Search for: "State v. Downs" Results 461 - 480 of 40,810
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jun 2024, 4:31 pm by Benson Varghese
Rahimi On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2024, 4:31 pm by Benson Varghese
Rahimi On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2024, 4:31 pm by Benson Varghese
Rahimi On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2024, 12:34 pm by Dennis Crouch
CLS Bank Intern., 573 U.S. 208 (2014); and Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. [read post]
23 Jun 2024, 9:31 am by Giles Peaker
Those submissions boiled down, in reality, to submissions of what Westminster might have been able to show if it had put forward evidence or explanation. [read post]
22 Jun 2024, 4:00 am by jonathanturley
Hunter and his legal team were counting on the Court striking down the federal gun law at issue in the case of United States v. [read post]
21 Jun 2024, 11:45 am by Michael C. Dorf
The day after it decided Bruen, the Court handed down its decision in Dobbs v. [read post]
21 Jun 2024, 8:12 am by Michael C. Dorf
I shall write about two of them on this blog next week: United States v. [read post]
21 Jun 2024, 1:48 am by INFORRM
Bruno Aiub (Monark) and State Prosecution Office (São Paulo, MPSP) v. [read post]
Introduction On 19 June 2024, The Hague Local Division handed down a judgment in a dispute brought by Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
In the United States, we’ve long had transactions in mutual funds generally settle in one day. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 2:41 pm
They get more than enough signatures on the initiative proposal, so it's scheduled to go to the voters in November.But the California Supreme Court, in a rare pre-election review, strikes down the thing and removes it from the ballot, unanimously holding that the scope of the initiative is so radical and wide-ranging that it constitutes an impermissible "revision" of the California Constitution rather than a mere amendment. [read post]