Search for: "State v. Liberator"
Results 4541 - 4560
of 7,774
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jan 2014, 10:45 am
Mere days later the same court, but a different judge, liberated the notion of marriage by striking down Utah legislation that restricted that state to a man and a woman: Kitchen et al. v. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 7:46 am
Supp. 2d 188, 194, fn. 5 (S.D.N.Y. 2006); Norex Petroleum Ltd. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
1 Jan 2014, 7:04 am
But is the problem a lack of technical knowledge, or is it a deeper failure to embrace the liberal values that we like to think are embodied in the internet? [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 3:29 pm
The case is Gregory v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 11:00 am
States recognize the broad policy goals of advancement and indemnity and will apply these statutes liberally to further those goals. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
This IMMI goes jointly to the Supreme Court for invalidating most of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in U.S. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 5:38 am
This IMMI goes jointly to the Supreme Court for invalidating most of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in U.S. v. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
This IMMI goes jointly to the Supreme Court for invalidating most of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in U.S. v. [read post]
29 Dec 2013, 8:07 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 4:15 pm
Otherwise, an offender could avoid sex offender registration requirements simply by moving his or her state of residence, thereby frustrating the purpose behind sex offender registration laws as in People v. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 1:47 pm
The other grounds of discrimination were said to be race, religion and age in the grounds; arguments that it discriminated against those against whom domestic violence had been perpetrated and large families were neither here nor there, albeit interesting in the context of the breadth of “other status” in Art 14.As regards justification, the DWP made clear that the policy has three aims: (1) introduce greater fairness in the welfare system between those receiving out-of-work benefits and… [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 1:47 pm
The other grounds of discrimination were said to be race, religion and age in the grounds; arguments that it discriminated against those against whom domestic violence had been perpetrated and large families were neither here nor there, albeit interesting in the context of the breadth of “other status” in Art 14.As regards justification, the DWP made clear that the policy has three aims: (1) introduce greater fairness in the welfare system between those receiving out-of-work benefits and… [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 6:25 am
Corp. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 6:18 am
Estate of Karen Parrish v. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 7:28 am
In George v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 9:18 am
That all changed once Commonwealth v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 6:04 am
Birla v. [read post]
22 Dec 2013, 9:57 am
It wastes no ink trying to identify the state objective being pursued, or asking whether the measure has any nexus with that objective.d. [read post]
