Search for: "Lucas v State"
Results 441 - 460
of 611
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Apr 2011, 11:04 pm
Lucas v. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 10:30 am
See Kurtz v. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 9:01 pm
See Kurtz v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 4:27 pm
(United States v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 7:23 am
The empire now includes locations in Cabo San Lucas, Marrakech, Marbella, Koh Samui , New York, Panama, St. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 2:06 pm
Justice Holmes' dissent in Lochner v. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 7:06 am
To paraphrase only slightly Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 10:45 am
Meier and Lucas E. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 6:02 am
v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 9:59 pm
As promised, here are the items I discussed during my two sessions: United States v. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 12:27 pm
Lucas v. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 11:27 am
Lucas v. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 12:25 am
Cambridge v Makin, heard 8 to 12 November 2010 (Tugendhat J) Pritchard Englefield & anr v Steinberg heard 19 November 2010 (Eady J) Wallis & anr v Meredith heard 29 November and 1 December 2010 (Christopher Clarke J) [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 1:07 pm
” (See Pittsburgh Press Co. v. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 1:52 pm
Boersema, Lucas ReijndersWater ResourcesIntroduction to water resources and environmental issues / Karrie Lynn Pennington, Thomas V. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 9:37 am
Lucas v. [read post]
10 Nov 2010, 6:30 am
Lucas, I'm just back from the U.S. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 3:31 pm
In today’s case (Mazur v. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 12:57 pm
No dice, held the court of appeals, in Lucas, "the United States Supreme Court held that in a takings case, where the property owner challenges a regulation as denying all economically beneficial or productive use of land, the regulatory action is 'compensable without a case-specific inquiry into the public interest advanced in support of the restraint.'" Slip op. at 9 (quoting Lucas v. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 4:08 pm
Nickerson would like to dismiss his federal claims and pursue state claims of fraud and legal malpractice against the Lucas Law Firm for wrongdoing not specified in the order. [read post]