Search for: "State v. So "
Results 4361 - 4380
of 117,863
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Aug 2010, 6:52 am
Spoerle v. [read post]
28 Dec 2008, 6:25 am
State v. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 8:55 am
In the case, County of Los Angeles v. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 11:11 am
U.S. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 5:54 pm
Abutahoun v. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 1:41 pm
The Castle v. [read post]
31 Oct 2009, 8:14 am
State v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 4:27 am
States can of course create rights going beyond those protected by the Convention, but their power to do so exists independently of the Convention and is subject to their own established constitutional principles. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 9:55 am
Maryland v. [read post]
8 Nov 2019, 7:22 am
However, this failure to update direct insurance procurement tax laws may literally prove costly, as illustrated under the recently decided New Jersey Tax Court case, Johnson & Johnson v. [read post]
19 Aug 2020, 12:33 pm
Again: Not so fast. [read post]
25 Aug 2016, 8:17 am
The Secretary of State refused to allow this. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 9:01 pm
In Coleman v. [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 6:09 am
Konrath State Legislator Doesn’t Understand That He Works for the Government–Attwood v. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 6:49 am
State of Hawaii, 122 Haw. 34, 222 P.3d 441 (Haw. [read post]
4 May 2012, 5:46 pm
The Upper Tribunal has handed down judgment in the case of Raed Mahajna v Secretary of State for the Home Department IA/21/21631/2011. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
[Josh Blackman] Trump v. United States Opines On Whether The Vice President Is a Legislative Officer
9 Jul 2024, 8:00 am
Part III-B-2 of Trump v. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:00 am
In Gilbert v. [read post]
