Search for: "State v. Lively" Results 5341 - 5360 of 28,991
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Dec 2020, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
In a case referred to it by Belgium's Constitutional Court, the Court of Justice of the European Union in Centraal Israëlitisch Consistorie van België and Others v. [read post]
17 Dec 2020, 9:57 am
  Penn State University, following many states and other institutions, closed  in early March in an effort to slow the progress of the disease and to reduce the strain on medical facilities. [read post]
16 Dec 2020, 4:00 am by Ken Chasse
And consider the great length and complexity of the Supreme Court of Canada’s reasoning and decision in, Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. [read post]
The district court dismissed these claims stating that the alleged taking had not sought compensation in the earlier state court proceedings as required by Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. [read post]
16 Dec 2020, 1:35 am by Rory Laide
AJ v DM [2019] is the leading authority on this situation concerning jurisdiction and locus for financial remedy proceedings. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 12:21 pm by Amy Howe
Moreover, the church continued, the state violated its right to free expression by allowing Black Lives Matter protests while limiting attendance at worship services. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 9:53 am by Patricia Hughes
We were firm in stating in our decision how reprehensible the cartoons were. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 9:07 am by Josh Blackman
Thus, there is no longer a present, live controversy between the parties. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 8:27 am by David Post
********* Now that the dust is starting to settle from the Supreme Court's decision in Texas v. [read post]
14 Dec 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing Matter of Bellamy v New York City Police Dept., 87 AD3d 874, the Appellate Division opined that the Fund met its burden of showing a possibility that disclosure of [such] names could endanger the lives or safety of police retirees, as required to exempt them from disclosure pursuant to Public Officers Law §87(2)(f)". [read post]
14 Dec 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing Matter of Bellamy v New York City Police Dept., 87 AD3d 874, the Appellate Division opined that the Fund met its burden of showing a possibility that disclosure of [such] names could endanger the lives or safety of police retirees, as required to exempt them from disclosure pursuant to Public Officers Law §87(2)(f)". [read post]