Search for: "Bartlett v. State"
Results 481 - 500
of 528
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2009, 12:26 pm
Kennedy in Bartlett v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 9:55 am
(33) Kansas v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 9:17 am
The Supreme Court has decided Bartlett v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 7:27 am
Only when a group of minority voters would form a majority in a single-member district must it be created as a remedy under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Court ruled in Bartlett v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 3:57 am
The Court ruled [opinion, PDF] 5-4 in Bartlett v. [read post]
28 Feb 2009, 7:06 am
On February 4, 2009, the CCA heard oral argument in the following cases:AP-75,654, Thomas Bartlett Whitaker v. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 12:33 am
Reardon, partners at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, discuss three of the Court's recent decisions: in Helmsley-Spear Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2009, 12:58 pm
Andrew Bartlett has a good post at Crikey canvassing this suggestion. [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 5:55 am
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. [read post]
11 Dec 2008, 2:00 pm
Princeton was represented by lawyers from Lowenstein Sandler and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. [read post]
26 Nov 2008, 5:23 pm
Judge Johnson dissented without an opinion.Roy Bob Bartlett v. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 11:16 pm
On Tuesday, October 14, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Bartlett v. [read post]
27 Oct 2008, 9:39 pm
United States (06-6911), and as amicus supporting petitioners in Warner-Lambert v. [read post]
15 Oct 2008, 8:46 am
Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard argument in Bartlett v. [read post]
14 Oct 2008, 9:01 pm
The Court spent an hour Tuesday talking about different approaches, in Bartlett v. [read post]
14 Oct 2008, 4:00 am
Following the release of orders, the Court will hear argument in Bartlett v. [read post]
13 Oct 2008, 1:59 pm
The Court will explore in Bartlett v. [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 4:00 am
Following the release of orders, the Court will hear argument in: Bartlett v. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 7:43 pm
Strine notes that Unocal’s board met for eight or nine hours to consider Pickens’ offer — a response to Smith v. [read post]
22 Jul 2008, 6:55 am
In United States v. [read post]
