Search for: "Harper v. State" Results 521 - 540 of 1,017
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Oct 2021, 9:08 am by Kyle Persaud
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Harper v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 9:08 am by Kyle Persaud
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Harper v. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  The book points out that neither the Federalist nor other early commentaries used the word “interposition” and that the term did not even surface in state protests against Chisholm v. [read post]
Harper, the petitioners argue that state courts and executive officials have no power to apply state voting laws and constitutions and that the exclusive decision maker for federal elections must be state legislators. [read post]
21 Jan 2020, 1:34 pm by Patricia Hughes
Duffy’s appeal is based on the loss of Senate immunity if it has engaged in wrongdoing, as the Senate did, he says, in taking its direction from the executive (Prime Minister Stephen Harper). [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 12:10 pm by David Smith
This was well-summarised by the Court in the following terms: (i) a claim for possession of land is the modern equivalent of a claim for ejectment (see the discussion in Secretary of State for the Environment v Meier [2009] UKSC 11; [2009] 1 WLR 2780, paragraphs 6-7, 26-33, and 59-61); (ii) a claim for ejectment (as opposed to a claim for an injunction in trespass) could only be maintained by someone who could establish a legal estate in the land (see e.g. per Lord Mansfield CJ,… [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 12:10 pm by David Smith
This was well-summarised by the Court in the following terms: (i) a claim for possession of land is the modern equivalent of a claim for ejectment (see the discussion in Secretary of State for the Environment v Meier [2009] UKSC 11; [2009] 1 WLR 2780, paragraphs 6-7, 26-33, and 59-61); (ii) a claim for ejectment (as opposed to a claim for an injunction in trespass) could only be maintained by someone who could establish a legal estate in the land (see e.g. per Lord Mansfield CJ,… [read post]