Search for: "State v. E. N. W."
Results 421 - 440
of 1,700
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Mar 2022, 9:01 pm
[And] [n]otable state judicial review under state constitutions in fact predated the Philadelphia Convention, Federalist No. 78, and Marbury v. [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 6:48 am
State v. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 2:16 pm
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW.Raso, Connor N. and William N. [read post]
18 Jun 2014, 5:43 am
The contents of all e-mails stored in the account, including copies of e-mails sent from the account;b. [read post]
16 Mar 2012, 5:12 am
See, e.g., Reno II, 528 U.S. at 334 n.3 (majority opinion) ("[W]e have never held that vote dilution violates the Fifteenth Amendment. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 12:15 am
Marie v. [read post]
27 Jan 2010, 6:54 am
LEXIS 13 (Jan. 21, 2010), the court stated in no uncertain terms: [W]e overrule both the holding and the reasoning in Constant and its progeny (including Pascarella and Barron), and conclude that a homosexual parent bears no special evidentiary presumption in a child custody case. . . . [read post]
27 Jun 2015, 2:50 pm
Would that be reviewable by a court, given that it involves a question of the validity to state law? [read post]
17 Sep 2013, 7:56 pm
Notes for:--Medellín v. [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 8:08 am
Kuehner, 194 N.J. 6, 20 (2008) (quoting State v. [read post]
17 Aug 2016, 6:55 am
Waterfront Comm’n of New York Harbor, 378 U.S. 52, 68 (1964). [read post]
22 Sep 2017, 6:59 am
Commonwealth v. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 5:00 am
§895.047(1)(e); Ford Motor Co. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 11:51 am
The court held that the entry was unconstitutional and not based on sufficient exigent circumstances: [W]e conclude that the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden of demonstrating exigent circumstances justifying a warrantless entry. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 9:28 am
State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Mar 2007, 11:51 am
Cohen, Walter N. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 6:30 am
Godard, V. [read post]
14 Jul 2013, 8:05 am
Castilo, 692 F.3d 108, 112 (2d Cir.2012) (citing 42 U.S.C. s 11603(e)(1)(A)). ( The Court observed in a footnote that parents cannot stipulate to habitual residency, see Barzilay v. [read post]
28 Feb 2007, 5:55 pm
State v. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 11:49 pm
V. [read post]