Search for: "People v. Downs"
Results 4161 - 4180
of 16,851
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 May 2022, 6:11 am
In this Fair Housing Act case, the plaintiff -- who operates a home for disabled adults -- sues people who want the residential portion of the home shut down. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 5:39 am
Belligerency is no way to get along with people. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 6:38 am
I totally overlooked this case when it came down in August 2015, but it's worth revisiting now because it affects everyone who handles wage and hour cases under the Fair Labor Standards Act.The case is Cheeks v. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 11:27 am
People v Nguyen Case Number: 14WM01973Trial counsel for the Defendant: Rudy Loewenstein [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 7:28 am
He's in for a second reversal in the same case--which is unusual, but he had it coming.When the appellate opinion is handed down, many people will be surprised that the case is still alive. [read post]
4 Nov 2013, 12:30 am
Deliberations continue today in State v. [read post]
1 Aug 2014, 9:22 pm
In Chittenden v. [read post]
15 May 2015, 10:56 am
Disabling online play for older games means that people won’t have online communities to rely on, and won’t be able to play. [read post]
6 Jan 2013, 6:49 pm
The case, People v Bylsma, arose out of Kent County and is distinctive because it is the first case under the Act that involves a collective grow operation.Ryan Bylsma was a certified care provider under the MMMA. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 4:41 am
But we're not so sure that her conviction for possession of a Taser would stand today.That's because three years ago, the Michigan Court of Appeals decided People v Yanna, which invalidated our state statute making possession of a Taser or stun gun illegal. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 10:30 am
(see Roberts v. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 11:27 am
People v Nguyen Case Number: 14WM01973Trial counsel for the Defendant: Rudy Loewenstein [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 6:18 am
People hate it when process servers show up. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 7:36 am
In the 1987 decision, McCleskey v. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 7:35 pm
Last summer, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals decided Dixon v. [read post]
31 Aug 2022, 7:20 am
Seligman, the question that would interest me starting out is why on earth did he write that crazy American Economic Review piece / amicus brief in Eisner v. [read post]
19 Nov 2022, 7:28 pm
Schenck wanted the conservatives on the court to hear from people who would hail them as heroes if they seized the opportunity to strike down Roe one day. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 4:18 pm
A documentary whose main thesis boiled down to “Hillary Clinton sucks” – this is the stuff of deep constitutional scholarship, people. [read post]
19 Jul 2008, 9:07 pm
In its opinion in United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 11:56 am
Hellerstedt, striking down a similar Texas law, requires the same result here. [read post]
