Search for: "Still v. Justice Court" Results 5201 - 5220 of 19,599
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jun 2012, 2:59 pm by Kirk Jenkins
We continue our preview of the new civil review grants from the Illinois Supreme Court with Russell v. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 8:48 pm by Transplanted Lawyer
What I'm really looking for in Salazar is the question of whether Justice O'Connor's "Endorsement Test" is still viable or whether a minimum of five justices affirmatively stated that they were abandoning that approach adopted by a majority of the Supreme Court in Doe v. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 3:39 am by Amy Howe
Yesterday the Court heard oral arguments in two cases:  Voisine v. [read post]
8 Sep 2016, 7:57 am by Jan Baran
If Citizens United were reversed presumably these rulings would still stand. [read post]
4 May 2017, 4:24 am by Edith Roberts
In an op-ed in Forbes, Nick Sibilla weighs in on the court’s decision in Nelson v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 3:23 pm by Lyle Denniston
Kerr offered to the Justices in Davis v. [read post]
27 May 2009, 7:01 pm
A potential Supreme Court Justice has been nominated, so let the wild speculation begin. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 1:29 pm by Amy Howe
One other less substantive, but still important, thing to keep in mind as you prepare: The press section will be crowded, and you may not be able to see some or all of the Justices. [read post]
2 Oct 2011, 5:18 am by SHG
  And they are still angry about it.It's reminiscent of the controversy that arose when the Supreme Court decided Board of Regents v. [read post]
30 Jul 2019, 11:15 am by Patricia Salkin
New Castle County, a case authored by the now-Supreme Court Justice Alito. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 4:31 pm by INFORRM
In the case of R (Ingenious Media) v HMRC ([2016] UKSC 54) UK Supreme Court held that information provided by taxpayers to HMRC is confidential and that HMRC acted unlawfully by disclosing such information to journalists. [read post]
13 Sep 2019, 6:31 am by Kalvis Golde
Ginsburg pivoted to note that women are still underrepresented among Supreme Court advocates. [read post]