Search for: "*long v. Murphy"
Results 321 - 340
of 755
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Nov 2006, 8:00 am
United States - see S2KM's Murphy wiki Arkansas DHS v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 5:37 pm
Luis V. [read post]
15 May 2023, 8:24 am
Ct., No. 93-C-790 (May 2, 1995) (Murphy, J.) [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 3:59 am
Highlights this week included: Slammed by judge, ACS:Law not allowed to drop file-sharing cases: Media C.A.T. v Adams (TorrentFreak) (TorrentFreak) (1709 Copyright Blog) (The Bright Spark) (Techdirt) Competition trumps IP in footie decoder pub brawl: Football Association Premier League Ltd & Others v QC Leisure & Others, Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd (IPKat) (1709 Blog) (1709 Blog) (IPKat) (Azrights) Please join the discussion by adding your… [read post]
30 Jul 2017, 5:24 pm
Murphy Oil USA, Inc. [read post]
27 Jul 2017, 2:10 pm
Murphy Oil USA, Inc. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm
Then, just last year, in Murphy v. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 8:47 am
But alas, the Court of Appeals of Maryland considered the exact same constitutional argument, and rejected it in Murphy v. [read post]
10 Jul 2022, 8:30 am
Doe v. [read post]
8 Jun 2017, 4:04 pm
Pundits understand this will be the first civil jury trial to be set down in Invercargill since Murphy v Kelly in 1919 (settled on the eve of trial, but which, as a sign of different times, would have been the eleventh libel jury trial in Invercargill since 1882). [read post]
15 Nov 2020, 3:13 pm
Nov. 6, 2020) Murphy v. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 7:39 am
United StatesYasui v. [read post]
12 Jan 2010, 5:29 am
Murphy, 134 A. 681, 682 (N.J.Err. [read post]
28 Apr 2017, 6:21 am
Finally, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines Artemio V. [read post]
19 Aug 2022, 3:19 am
Murphy further expanded the NJDOL’s stop-work powers in January 2020 when he signed a package of laws in response to recommendations by a Misclassification Task Force report released in July 2019. [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 1:56 pm
Murphy (now called Sharp v. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 11:31 am
” (slip op. at 23-24) (citing Strickland and United States v. [read post]
22 Dec 2006, 6:53 pm
Murphy v. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 6:15 am
Couden v. [read post]
3 Jun 2010, 7:55 pm
” The Appellate Division ruled that the individual was entitled to such a hearing [Murphy v City of New York, 35 AD3d 319].Further, on the issue of “public disclosure,” courts have ruled that the internal disclosure of allegedly stigmatizing reasons for the discharge or demotion of an employee to agency administrators “having a right to know” does not constitute a public disclosure of such information and thus a name-clearing hearing" was not… [read post]
