Search for: "State v. Staggers"
Results 461 - 480
of 740
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jul 2012, 4:59 am
State v. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 5:03 pm
Mick Haig Productions E.K. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 5:03 pm
Mick Haig Productions E.K. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 3:27 pm
” AG Acceptance Corp. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 9:50 am
Underwater homeowners in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura and San Diego counties were a staggering $138.9 billion deep in negative equity at the end of the first quarter, Zillow reported. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 10:11 am
Supreme Court ruled in Edwards v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 12:02 pm
In Ward v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 5:26 am
Back in 2005, in Gonzalez v. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 12:57 am
As Mr Justice Peter Jackson pointed out, the history of the case was "recorded in a staggering 19,000 pages of social work records". [read post]
17 Jun 2012, 8:59 am
” U.S. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 8:15 pm
Flawed at its inception, the doctrine languished, with no states adopting it until the Supreme Court’s decision in Garcetti v. [read post]
9 Jun 2012, 5:13 am
” California: On May 14, 2012, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California issued a lengthy decision (Vance’s Foods, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Jun 2012, 5:24 am
The Supreme Court itself in its 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. [read post]
29 May 2012, 6:53 am
Several privacy and antitrust complaints are now menacing Google. [read post]
24 May 2012, 5:00 am
EPA and American Electric Power v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 3:54 am
,Suchomajcz v Hummel Chem. [read post]
10 May 2012, 2:01 pm
In Western Blue Print Company, LLC v. [read post]
10 May 2012, 1:01 pm
In Western Blue Print Company, LLC v. [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 4:34 am
” The 9th Circuit based its decision on Jackson v. [read post]
25 Mar 2012, 8:32 am
Suffice it to say, the issue is whether the expansion of Medicaid eligibility in the ACA, which the parties agree would be severable from the rest of the bill if the minimum essential coverage provision were invalidated, itself violates the Tenth Amendment by "coercing" the states--along the lines Chief Justice Rehnquist hinted at in his majority opinion in South Dakota v. [read post]
