Search for: "Held v. State" Results 5421 - 5440 of 82,195
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Jul 2016, 8:16 pm by Kate Howard
The petition of the day is: Jones v. [read post]
1 Jun 2009, 10:31 am
The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari today (courtesy of SCOTUS Blog) in the case Bilski v. [read post]
9 Feb 2022, 10:00 pm
The decision—which held that, under some circumstances, a loan originated by a bank became subject to state usury laws once transferred to a non-bank—implicitly rejected the long-standing doctrine of “valid when made” and once threatened to upend the lending industry. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 3:00 am by Paul Caron
David Cay Johnston (Syracuse), Manufacturing Tax Break Gone Wild, 140 Tax Notes 621 (Aug. 5, 2013): A federal judge [United States v. [read post]
5 Sep 2017, 9:00 am by Steven L. Owen
Two years have passed since the United States Supreme Court passed down a 5-4 decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
14 Jun 2016, 6:25 am by Justin Cosgrove
The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] unanimously Monday in United States v. [read post]
30 Jun 2009, 9:11 pm
7-1-2009 Washington DC:The United States Supreme Court ruled in Safford Unified School District #1, et al. v. [read post]
21 Jul 2008, 6:30 am
Back in 1981, the High Court in Gazzo v Comptroller of Stamps (Vic) held that s.90 was not valid so far as it applied to transfers of land in Victoria, in attempting to prevent Victorian stamp duty being charged. [read post]
27 Feb 2017, 10:15 am by Howard Friedman
  In the case, a Minnesota state court of appeals held that the First Amendment does not prevent a civil court from adjudicating a challenge to the manner in which the Lutheran Church retirement plans were managed. [read post]
5 Sep 2017, 9:00 am by Steven L. Owen
Two years have passed since the United States Supreme Court passed down a 5-4 decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
11 Dec 2006, 2:17 am
Musladin [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], where the Court held that a federal appeals court improperly overturned a state court ruling allowing a murder victim's family to wear buttons depicting the victim's face during a criminal trial. [read post]