Search for: "Wells v. Justice Court" Results 3561 - 3580 of 29,120
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2008, 10:03 am
This case is particularly hard to predict because the majority opinion could very well be written by more than one Justice, like in McConnell v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 1:17 pm by WIMS
§ 7412(n)(4), Title V does not grant the oil and gas industry immunity from aggregation; this court should not effectively create such a provision when Congress has not done so. [read post]
23 May 2017, 2:32 pm by Anita Earls
North Carolina, as well as a pending partisan-gerrymandering case, League of Women Voters v. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 9:00 am by Amanda Frost
The Supreme Court dodged that question in Evenwel, but depending on the outcome of Department of Commerce v. [read post]
29 Aug 2022, 2:02 pm
Justice Kruger's concurrence is multifaceted (and incredibly well-written), so an abbreviated version definitely won't do it justice. [read post]
Workers compensation lawyers and legal practitioners are sitting on the edge of their seats awaiting the ruling of the Supreme Court in the high profile case of Castellanos v. [read post]
18 Nov 2020, 12:05 pm by Adam Feldman
Some might say the lines were clearly drawn in the court’s 5-4 decision in Shelby County v. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
First, a crucial bloc of the Supreme Court (with Justice Kennedy being a key member) in the famous 1992 Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 12:16 pm
  This holding conflicts with a 1991 decision of the Court of Appeal in a case called Gilman, but is consisted with a different case (Stallman) decided that same year as well as a subsequent decision (Johnson).In my view, it's more than about time for the California Supreme Court to definitively resolve this two-decade old split. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 4:52 am by Amy Howe
Briefly: In an op-ed for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse criticizes the Court’s announcement on Monday that it will not review Cunningham v. [read post]