Search for: "Doe V" Results 21 - 40 of 152,191
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2024, 9:58 am by Michael C. Dorf
The majority opinion does not provide a definitive answer to that question, but it does repeatedly cite Marbury v. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 9:50 am by Will Baude
She did something similar in the consolidated cases in Students for Fair Admissions v. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 9:06 am by Eric Fruits
The industry petitioners argue that the FCC’s approach departs from the burden-shifting framework established by the Supreme Court in cases like Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 8:01 am
The Chief writes the opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v Secretary of Commerce. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 7:38 am by Patrick Bracher (ZA)
[Gensinger and Neave CC v Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy [2024] ZASCA 49 (15 April 2024)] [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 7:15 am by Laura
An Xydhias agreement derives from a case Xydhias v Xydhias [1991] 1 FLR 683. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Nearly two decades ago, Graber contended that Chief Justice Roger Taney’s infamous pro-slavery majority opinion for the Court in Dred Scott v. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 6:17 am by Ronald Mann
” When Roberts turned to explaining why this particular matter does not involve a public right, he relied heavily on Granfinanciera v. [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The penalty of dismissal from employment as a police officer for use of cocaine does not shock the conscience and is not disproportionate to the misconduct (Matter of Gordon v Brown, 84 NY2d 574, 580 [1994]). [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
The penalty of dismissal from employment as a police officer for use of cocaine does not shock the conscience and is not disproportionate to the misconduct (Matter of Gordon v Brown, 84 NY2d 574, 580 [1994]). [read post]
28 Jun 2024, 5:31 am by Patrick Bracher (ZA)
Exhaustion of the underlying policy does not mean that the risk is outside the scope of the policy. [read post]