Search for: "Park v. State"
Results 4721 - 4740
of 10,611
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Sep 2015, 8:10 am
On September 16, 2015, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of State v. [read post]
22 Sep 2015, 8:29 pm
Dep't. of Parks and Wildlife v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 1:36 pm
Kent Higgins, et al. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 1:36 pm
Kent Higgins, et al. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 12:34 pm
In City of Socorro v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 7:16 am
In a decision last week in United States v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 6:04 am
” It cited the state constitution’s right to bear arms, which secures the “individual right of the people to keep and bear arms for security and defense of self, family, others, property, or the state” (though the Utah Supreme Court has held that employers may fire employees for possessing guns on employer property, including parking lots, Hansen v. [read post]
18 Sep 2015, 9:12 pm
Several participants offered some—Rosa Parks [Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz], Susan B. [read post]
18 Sep 2015, 2:29 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2015, 2:07 pm
Oak Park, which were jointly decided by the Supreme Court in 2010, making the Second Amendment applicable to state and local governments. [read post]
16 Sep 2015, 11:25 am
In the case of Doe v. [read post]
16 Sep 2015, 6:07 am
Parke, Davis & Co., 297 N.W.2d 252, 258 (Minn. 1980); Dadd v. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 6:07 pm
Businesses with large parking lots or buildings could face thousands in storm water fees. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 8:00 am
Partnership v. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 9:17 am
Such a rationale for restricting speech is generally not accepted for speech on sidewalks or in parks, but some lower court judges have accepted it for speech in K-12 schools, based on the Tinker v. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 1:00 am
In the Court of Appeal, the court considered the development of the case law, especially the recent cases of Murray v Leisureplay Plc [2005] EWCA Civ 963 and El Makdessi v Cavendish Square Holdings BV [2013] EWCA Civ 1539, stating (per Lord Justice Moore-Bick at paragraph 21): “[T]he modern cases thus appear to accept that a clause providing for payment on a breach of a sum of money that exceeds the amount that a court would award as compensation…may not be… [read post]
10 Sep 2015, 11:40 am
They do not.The case is United Veterans Memorial v. [read post]
10 Sep 2015, 8:00 am
Tuomi v. [read post]
9 Sep 2015, 9:37 am
City of Marina v. [read post]
