Search for: "A. E. v. State of Alabama "
Results 361 - 380
of 623
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2014, 7:44 am
This post was contributed by Gina E. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 6:23 am
” Justice Thomas, with whom Justices Scalia and Alito joined, wrote a separate concurring opinion (Lane v Franks, June 19, 2104, Sotomayor, S). [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 4:19 pm
In its brief in Alabama Department of Revenue v. [read post]
9 Jun 2014, 11:04 am
This limitation of “present capacity” was echoed by a California state court in Stockwell v. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 12:39 pm
As the Court there stated, “[w]e deal here with the rights of free speech and press in a basic form: the right to express views on matters before the electorate. [read post]
15 May 2014, 3:00 am
Spillman v. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 9:00 am
” Kay E. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 1:00 pm
Prior to H.B. 232, Kentucky was one of only four states—including Alabama, New Mexico, and South Dakota—that had not adopted data breach notification legislation. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 7:41 am
On March 31, 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States denied certiorari in Bank of America, N.A. v. [read post]
28 Mar 2014, 3:13 am
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama recently held in Bruce v. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 7:26 am
Bruce's counsel in discovery in the state matter. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 4:32 am
One state (Alabama) enacted a constitutional amendment that did the same. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 2:13 pm
Alabama. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 12:41 pm
Some state’s statutes exempt conduct in "compliance" with relevant governmental oversight, which we’re taking to mean "FDA," regulations (Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon). [read post]
28 Feb 2014, 9:13 am
The United States Supreme Court decided Hinton v. [read post]
24 Feb 2014, 8:14 am
The state courts failed to correctly apply the "prejudice" prong of Strickland v. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 12:00 pm
Instead, the court determined that it must apply the two-prong test announced by the Supreme Court of the United States in Chandris, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 12:00 pm
Visciotti and its progeny, by finding a state court’s application of Beck v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 7:20 am
Chesapeake), and one the subject of a Section 1071(b) civil action for review (U. of Alabama v. [read post]
20 Jan 2014, 2:00 am
On January 16, 2014, Pillsbury attorneys John E. [read post]
