Search for: "Church v. Church" Results 3861 - 3880 of 7,901
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Dec 2010, 10:11 am by Nate Persily
Supreme Court, Congress, Churches, Corporations, and the President. [read post]
26 Oct 2007, 2:03 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Neil Martin Ltd v HM Revenue & Customs [2007] EWCA Civ 1041 (25 October 2007) Cadogan & Anor v Sportelli & Anor [2007] EWCA Civ 1042 (25 October 2007) Boudh v Bodh [2007] EWCA Civ 1019 (25 October 2007) AA (Somalia) v SSHD [2007] EWCA Civ 1040 (25 October 2007) Kohn v Wagschal & Ors [2007] EWCA Civ 1022 (24 October 2007) Poole & Ors v HM Treasury [2007] EWCA Civ 1021… [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 8:33 am by Lyle Denniston
  In that case, the Court allowed the government to apply “neutral and general” laws to some religious practices, but the Chief Justice on Wednesday said that did not control the new ruling — in the case of Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Church and School v. [read post]
16 Aug 2023, 8:22 am by Eric Goldman
New Destiny Church * ‘Reaction’ Video Protected By Fair Use–Hosseinzadeh v. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 6:28 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
This time, the issue involves the speech rights of public employees.The case is Kennedy v. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 5:45 am by Howard Friedman
Another Paper Attempting to Reconcile Abortion Jurisprudence and the Doctrine of Precedent Considering Dobbs v. [read post]
15 Jan 2025, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Thus, we agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff was not discharged due to a protected recreational activity within the scope of Labor Law §201-d(2)(c) (see id.; Bilquin v Roman Catholic Church, Diocese of Rockville Ctr., 286 AD2d 409). [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 4:05 am by Howard Friedman
Lombardi, Reynolds Revisited: The Original Meaning of Reynolds v. [read post]
31 May 2015, 5:57 pm
NSAFirst Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. [read post]
15 Jan 2025, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Thus, we agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff was not discharged due to a protected recreational activity within the scope of Labor Law §201-d(2)(c) (see id.; Bilquin v Roman Catholic Church, Diocese of Rockville Ctr., 286 AD2d 409). [read post]