Search for: "Holding v. State"
Results 501 - 520
of 63,733
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Apr 2016, 10:53 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 8:16 am
On Tuesday, in AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
20 Oct 2014, 5:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2024, 1:45 am
However, a closely related question was addressed by the United States Supreme Court in Powell v. [read post]
13 Jan 2022, 5:01 am
Dobbs v. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 6:34 pm
United States v. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 6:34 am
United States, 10-7515, for United States v. [read post]
30 Oct 2007, 8:19 am
In United States v. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 1:32 am
Background Last week the Supreme Court handed down judgment in R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 35. [read post]
28 Jul 2009, 6:35 am
In Azure Limited v. [read post]
1 Jul 2014, 5:07 pm
By Jim Cline In a decision on a case that had presented significant financial and operational important to Public Employee Unions, the United States Supreme Court held this Monday in Harris v Quinn that the Illinois law, as applied to a special class of home health care workers, unconstitutionally imposed a “fair share” dues payment […]The post In Closely Watched Decision, Supreme Court declines to Hold Mandatory Union Dues Clauses Unconstitutional… [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 9:47 am
, Holding: A defendant is subject to the highest mandatory minimum specified for his conduct in 18 U.S.C. 924(c) unless another provision of law directed to conduct proscribed by Section 924(c) specifically imposes an even greater mandatory minimum sentence. [read post]
12 Aug 2010, 8:49 am
United States (Fed. [read post]
10 Sep 2009, 7:23 am
Nancy Welsh (nxw10@DSL.PSU.EDU) of Penn State, Dickinson School of Law has announced the following conference: On Friday, March 26, 2010, Penn State will hold a symposium addressing the Supreme Court's recent decision in Ashcroft v. [read post]
25 Jul 2014, 1:20 pm
Professor O’Hear has already offered a helpful analysis on that holding and its implications for the field of criminal law. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 12:30 pm
SE v. [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 9:30 pm
Lord Camden ruled firmly in Entick’s favour, holding that the warrant of a Secretary of State could not render lawful actions such as these which were otherwise unlawful.The case is a canonical statement of the common law’s commitment to the constitutional principle of the rule of law. [read post]
26 Jan 2018, 6:38 am
State v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 1:42 pm
United States, holding that its decision in Johnson v. [read post]
11 Jun 2019, 9:01 am
The United States Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Mission Product Holdings, Inc. [read post]
