Search for: "State v. Law" Results 3241 - 3260 of 157,649
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jun 2005, 8:11 am
Granville [PDF opinion] Ohio courts have issued conflicting rulings on the state's custody law. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 8:55 pm by Lawrence Solum
Susan Haack (University of Miami - School of Law) has posted Pragmatism, Law, and Morality: The Lessons of Buck v. [read post]
18 Sep 2019, 12:21 pm by Frank Ravitch
Stowers Chair in Law & Religion at Michigan State University College of Law. [read post]
14 Oct 2022, 8:37 am
Today's advance release criminal law opinions: State v. [read post]
12 May 2023, 8:45 am
Today's advance release criminal law opinions: State v. [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 9:03 am
Today's advance release criminal law opinions: State v. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 2:01 am by Holger Hembach
In Robathin v Austria, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) scrutinized a search and seizure in a law office in light of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 4:30 am by Lawrence Solum
This Essay presents the Court’s recent decision in Wooden v. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 8:30 am by Steven G. Pearl
The Court described its holding as follows: These consolidated appeals involve the sometimes delicate and precarious dance between state law and federal law. [read post]
They claimed that after Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022, the groups stopped aiding Texan women to leave the state to get abortions—because of the fear of prosecution under the states abortion ban. [read post]
11 Feb 2021, 11:22 am by CrimProf BlogEditor
Fletcher (Michigan State University - College of Law) has posted Muskrat Textualism on SSRN. [read post]
23 Oct 2006, 3:43 am by Tobias Thienel
United Kingdom, at para. 36), whereas conversely, the inability of the police to commit a certain tort in English law (as a point of substantive law) is often described as an ‘immunity’ (see for criticism of this terminology Barrett v. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 1:20 pm
  We rely on state law to decide whether to take someone's default (since Rule 4(e)(1) borrows state law). [read post]