Search for: "Dade v. US" Results 481 - 500 of 532
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jun 2009, 4:42 pm
Using this legal argument, counties aren't legally responsible to pay for the expenses of their local OCCCRC (pursuant to Article V, section 14 of the Florida Constitution). [read post]
17 Jun 2009, 11:23 pm
 (you did ask us to say "hello" David.)If it's sometime after Wednesday, it's time for.....Ward v. [read post]
25 May 2009, 12:47 pm
In the US, BDO Seidman had revenues of $589 million in 2006, 3,800 employees,. 250 partners and 34 offices. [read post]
30 Mar 2009, 8:44 am
Miami-Dade County, Florida, No. 08-567 (cert. petition filed Oct. 27, 2008), another case asking the Court to overrule Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 10:21 am
Miami-Dade County, Florida, No. 08-567 (cert. petition filed Oct. 27, 2008) is a "petition to watch" for the Supreme Court's March 27, 2009 conference.The petition asks the Court to overrule Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 3:45 pm
On the issue of highest and best use of the property for valuation purposes, the landowners asserted that the Park Service had improperly influenced Dade County to decrease the allowable density, and thus make the parcels cheaper to acquire. [read post]
9 Feb 2009, 3:04 am
This is all a preface to letting you know that there’s a post on discourse.net about this week’s 11th Circuit decision in ACLU of Florida v Miami-Dade County School Board (read the decision here (pdf), read the blog post here, and his earlier coverage here), which is a good blend of the two - a discussion of the case but also put into the context of local politics, which does add to the picture - in fact, it makes it much more interesting as a case. [read post]
14 Jan 2009, 8:55 am
Miami-Dade County, Florida, No. 08-567 (cert. petition filed Oct. 27, 2008).The second part of Williamson County is the "final determination" rule which requires that the regulator have reached a final decision of what uses would be allowed on the property. [read post]
25 Nov 2008, 5:36 pm
  Due to the peculiar way that the adoption statute defines "homosexual" in terms of conduct rather than status, there is a clear conflict with the US Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 2:00 pm
The Supreme Court ruled in the 2005 case Roper v. [read post]