Search for: "Foster v. Superior Court"
Results 321 - 340
of 349
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Sep 2016, 4:48 pm
The bill would also prohibit employers from seeking or utilizing any information related to juvenile arrests, detentions, or court dispositions as a factor in their employment determination. [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 12:55 pm
Impeachment Hearings: Tuesday, November 19, 2019, at 9:00 a.m.: The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) will hear testimony from Jennifer Williams, the special advisor for Europe and Russia in the office of the vice president, and Lt. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 4:00 am
They may live in foster homes or even with friends or neighbours. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 2:15 pm
We are skeptical that Heckler v. [read post]
14 Nov 2022, 4:00 am
According to the logic of The Reasoning State, whatever flaw exists in West Virginia v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 7:01 am
This note compares the reasoning of the English court in Shamil Bank v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 7:01 am
This note compares the reasoning of the English court in Shamil Bank v. [read post]
19 Dec 2009, 5:27 am
The whole point of the business judgment rule is to prevent courts from even asking the question: did the board breach its duty of care? [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 7:46 pm
Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council 26/9 Elaboration of an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights The Human Rights Council,Recalling the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, Recalling also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Recalling… [read post]
7 Jun 2017, 2:30 pm
This bill is aimed at religiously affiliated institutions, noting (in language that would not be codified) the Legislature’s agreement with Justice Alito in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 6:02 pm
”[21] The Panel explains that this formulation is desirable because it will provide the courts and litigants with notice of appropriate uses of the legislation, and by doing so, it will deter litigation that does not fall within the appropriate uses.[22] As well, a purpose clause will help litigants differentiate between SLAPPs and non-SLAPPs, the latter of which is subject to the limited remedies for traditional civil actions.[23] An effective purpose clause plays the crucial roles… [read post]
22 Mar 2021, 8:01 am
Nicholas Burns, former undersecretary of state for political affairs; Abigail Golden-Vázquez, vice president and founding executive director of the Aspen Institute Latinos and Society Program; and Amb. [read post]
3 Oct 2016, 1:54 pm
AB 2535 comes on the heels of the recent federal decision, Garnett v. [read post]
19 Jul 2024, 6:30 am
” Plans for tennis sets “between East and West” fail and the “usual club couples” monopolize the courts instead (p. 47). [read post]
11 Feb 2022, 3:00 am
The majority did not provide a reason for stopping the lower court’s decision. [read post]
14 Aug 2010, 5:09 am
A: Mutilation v. destruction: people do debate which is worse. [read post]
19 May 2010, 4:36 pm
Circuit’s recent decision in Comcast v. [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 8:58 pm
More recently, Gregory Shill of the University of Iowa College of Law describes in The Atlantic how the law effectively compels the use of the automobile, repeating the 1977 SCOTUS reference in Wooley v. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 9:11 pm
Click Here Center for Biological Diversity v. [read post]
6 Jan 2020, 1:43 pm
Event Announcements (More details on the Events Calendar) Thursday, Jan. 9, 2:00 p.m.: The Brookings Institution, the American Political Science Association, and the R Street Institute will be hosting an expert panel debating the role of Congress and the changes that need to be made for Congress to meet the current challenges facing American political institutions. [read post]
