Search for: "State v. Kim" Results 401 - 420 of 1,290
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Oct 2023, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
A notice of Saul Cornell’s research in advance of the oral arguments in United States v. [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 3:01 pm by The JAG HUNTER
Wong Kim Ark (which was citing U.S. v Rhodes, noting that one could only be a British subject or a natural-born citizen, and not hold both citizenships): All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens.” LINK [read post]
20 Oct 2024, 4:45 am by Frank Cranmer
: The law and politics of creation of the micro religious Bektashi state in Albania: we mentioned the project briefly a couple of weeks ago – Istrefi and Pasquet suggest that it is by no means as straightforward as the Albanian Prime Minister thinks it is. [read post]
11 Nov 2010, 5:23 pm by Mike
(U.S. 1940) (so are price-fixing agreements); United States v. [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 4:37 am by Edith Roberts
United States, during which Justice Stephen Breyer drew from popular culture headlines with a hypothetical question based on “the recent Kim Kardashian jewelry heist in Paris. [read post]
Coughenour rejected this argument as, among other things, contravening longstanding precedent in United States v. [read post]
1 Dec 2015, 2:48 am by Amy Howe
United States, with Ben Rosales and Thomas Nomura Kim providing Cornell’s preview. [read post]
9 Jan 2018, 4:32 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks whether the government must obtain a warrant for cell-site-location information, and Cyan v. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 8:25 pm by Sri Medicherla
Kim stated that the bill is meant to ensure greater transparency over defense contractors and “make sure that Americans know our defense force has their backs. [read post]
22 Nov 2007, 1:13 pm
Reporting on the COA's Nov. 9th decision in Christina Roush v. [read post]
27 Nov 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing Ji Sun Jennifer Kim v Goldberg, Weprin, Finkel, Goldstein, LLP, 120 AD3d 18, the Appellate Division opined that Plaintiff's complaint failed to state a cause of action for hostile work environment under New York City's City Human Rights Law* because it does not allege that Defendants' actions occurred under circumstances that gave rise to an inference of discrimination. [read post]