Search for: "US v. Brown" Results 4361 - 4380 of 7,310
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Nov 2014, 2:36 pm by Arthur F. Coon
  In sum, just as Governor Brown once called CEQA reform “the Lord’s work,” the Third District has reminded us that what the Legislature giveth, it may also taketh away. [read post]
” The virtually ubiquitous presumption entertained by federal courts since Singleton v. [read post]
15 May 2023, 10:57 am by Amy Howe
The justices granted review in two cases presenting this question, Brown v. [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
~Thomas Jefferson, 1789 To underscore these points, the Framers provided in Article V, not just one but two methods (and four paths) for amendment. [read post]
22 May 2022, 4:00 am by Administrator
Lack of embellishment cannot be used to bolster the complainant’s credibility — it simply does not weigh against it. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 4:30 am by Jim Dedman
So, we won't be including tunes like Warren Zevon's "Lawyers, Guns, and Money" or Jackson Browne's "Lawyers in Love," because Steve and Jim beat us to those and several others that come to mind. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 7:29 am by John Elwood
Brown, 11-391, and Clarksburg Nursing Home & Rehabilitation Center, LLC v. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 2:48 am by Amy Howe
” Remember, we rely exclusively on our readers to send us links for our round-up. [read post]
7 Jun 2016, 6:58 am by Amy Howe
Texas, in which the Court will consider whether the state used the correct standard to determine whether death-row inmate Bobby James Moore is too intellectually disabled to be executed, as well as the grant in Buck v. [read post]
14 Mar 2017, 4:27 am by Edith Roberts
” In an op-ed in The Hill, Carolyn Shapiro argues that Democratic senators should try to” get behind the smokescreen” created by “the rhetoric of neutrality” by, for example, using Brown v. [read post]
20 Feb 2009, 2:00 am
(Public Knowledge)   US Copyright – Decisions S D Ohio: RIAA’s need for discovery was not so urgent: Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc. v. [read post]