Search for: "Bounds v. Smith"
Results 521 - 540
of 807
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Aug 2022, 6:05 am
” [Citing Smith v. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
Article V, §6, in pertinent part, requires that “Appointments and promotions in the civil service of the state and all of the civil divisions thereof, including cities and villages, shall be made according to merit and fitness to be ascertained, as far as practicable, by examination which, as far as practicable, shall be competitive…. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
Article V, §6, in pertinent part, requires that “Appointments and promotions in the civil service of the state and all of the civil divisions thereof, including cities and villages, shall be made according to merit and fitness to be ascertained, as far as practicable, by examination which, as far as practicable, shall be competitive…. [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 10:26 am
It is axiomatic that, if a defendant fails to comply with a plea agreement, the State is not bound by that agreement. [read post]
6 Jun 2019, 8:07 am
Smith; and (3) whether the Supreme Court should reaffirm Smith’s hybrid-rights doctrine, applying strict scrutiny to free exercise claims that implicate other fundamental rights, and resolve the circuit split over the doctrine’s precedential status. [read post]
17 Jul 2021, 8:14 am
” Hess v. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 2:34 pm
Tendering of a cheque can amount to (conditional) payment, if the cheque is honoured (Felix Hadley & Co v Hadley (1898) 2 Ch 681 ), and if so, counts as payment at the date the cheque is tendered (Homes v Smith (2000) Lloyds LR 139 ). [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 7:11 am
While Judge Smith concurred in the judgment, he disagreed that the district court “should have viewed itself as bound under the Seventh Amendment” because the employee “needed to make the same factual showing and to meet the same defenses” in order to obtain both future lost earnings and reinstatement. [read post]
15 Jan 2012, 8:27 pm
The argument put forward by some claimant representatives was that explained in Smiths Dock v Edwards [2004] EWHC 1116 QB: “Mr Morgan QC submitted that because most wholly unsuccessful cases reach trial whilst most successful cases settle before trial, there is a disequilibrium that should result in higher success fees. [read post]
3 Mar 2024, 8:09 am
” Smith v. [read post]
1 Sep 2023, 1:32 am
If they proposed some Huawei v. [read post]
12 Mar 2024, 12:46 pm
June 20, 2000) (noting that “question of intent is a classic jury question and not one for experts”); Smith v. [read post]
20 Mar 2019, 5:17 pm
Graham Smith has recently made this point. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 7:34 pm
Smith v. [read post]
7 Oct 2010, 12:27 pm
Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2024, 5:24 am
I was discussing the Fourth Circuit case of Porter v. [read post]
24 May 2012, 4:19 am
Employment Division v. [read post]
19 Feb 2008, 8:51 pm
In re Will of Smith, 108 N.J. 257, 264, 528 A.2d 918 (1987). [read post]
9 Jan 2023, 5:00 am
Smith, “Liberalism and Hate Speech,” Law and Religion Forum (2022) Week 10, Thursday, April 13: Compelled Speech and Association West Virginia State Board of Education v. [read post]
7 Aug 2015, 7:53 am
Also assignment stage: bounded willpower/short-sightedness; social preferences for “fair” allocations v. the endowment effect. [read post]
