Search for: "State v. City Court of City of Tucson"
Results 21 - 40
of 48
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jan 2016, 8:30 am
Supreme Court’s direction, the city cannot dictate religious viewpoints or the content of a prayer. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 7:29 am
Yesterday’s oral arguments in Fisher v. [read post]
10 Sep 2015, 9:45 am
Sept. 20, 2015, 1-4:30 PM, Tucson, AZ, University of Arizona, Rogers College of Law: Constitution Day panel on notable Supreme Court cases of the most recent term. [read post]
28 Jun 2015, 9:53 am
” McNaughton v. [read post]
28 Jun 2015, 4:53 am
” McNaughton v. [read post]
16 Nov 2014, 4:52 pm
Supreme Court’s June 2013 decision in United States v. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 9:01 pm
The Supreme Court made clear in New York v. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 8:15 am
City Court of Tucson, 150 Ariz. 99, 722 P.2d 267 (1986)); 6. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 7:02 am
Lone Wolf v. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 7:02 am
Lone Wolf v. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 8:30 am
(Wry v. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 7:58 am
City of New London. [read post]
15 Oct 2011, 5:11 am
I have also enjoyed working with Bob and Tracy on some projects, including some pro bono amicus briefs in the Supreme Court (including in McConnell v. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 12:21 pm
As part of the Fall Meeting of the ABA's Section of State & Local Government Law in Tucson, on Thursday, September 22, I was on a panel discussing the Supreme Court's recent decision in Nevada Commission on Ethics v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 12:00 am
(Thursday night I ducked out of the reception early, to catch the Padres v. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 6:07 am
The government relied on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in U.S. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 5:54 pm
When it comes to violent crimes like assault and murder, the vast majority of cases are tried in state courts. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 8:00 am
At Overlawyered, Walter Olson comments on the Court’s denial of mandamus in Comer v. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 9:03 pm
City of Burbank, 09-55239 (9th Cir. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 6:35 am
Carrigan, in which the Court will consider whether states may prohibit a government official from voting on an issue in which he may have a personal conflict. [read post]
