Search for: "State v. Fair"
Results 5481 - 5500
of 27,437
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 May 2008, 2:15 am
In State of West Virginia v. [read post]
2 Jan 2007, 6:02 am
In Party Magic Enterprises, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2007, 4:48 am
In Rhodes v. [read post]
2 Jan 2007, 6:02 am
In Party Magic Enterprises, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jan 2007, 10:02 am
INDICTMENT/APPEALUnited States v. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 3:52 am
The lead opinion in State v. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 4:47 pm
Only the previous day, he had joined the opinion of the Chief Justice for the Court in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc v President and Fellows of Harvard College 600 US (2023) (Opinion (pdf) | Justia) in which Roberts CJ held that race-based admissions programs did not survive strict scrutiny. [read post]
27 Aug 2018, 6:40 am
It is fair to assume that the legislature is aware of this court’s precedent. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 4:53 pm
In Medžlis Islamske Zajednice Brčko and Others v. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 6:59 am
Next week, the court will consider whether the Fair Housing Act prohibits policies that have a discriminatory effect, regardless of whether they were adopted with the intent to discriminate, in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. the Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. [read post]
18 Jun 2024, 7:57 am
In the Maryland case of Wolff v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 11:52 am
On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court decided Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2018, 11:00 pm
"Explaining that due process and fundamental fairness require that a qualification or requirement for employment must be expressly stated in order for an employer to bypass the protections afforded by the Civil Service Law or a collective bargaining agreement and summarily terminate an employee, the Appellate Division said that in this instance the requirement of a commercial driver's license is not "expressly stated. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 7:08 am
The seminal case in this area is Glatt v. [read post]
8 Nov 2018, 11:00 pm
"Explaining that due process and fundamental fairness require that a qualification or requirement for employment must be expressly stated in order for an employer to bypass the protections afforded by the Civil Service Law or a collective bargaining agreement and summarily terminate an employee, the Appellate Division said that in this instance the requirement of a commercial driver's license is not "expressly stated. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 5:00 am
"Explaining that due process and fundamental fairness require that a qualification or requirement for employment must be expressly stated in order for an employer to bypass the protections afforded by the Civil Service Law or a collective bargaining agreement and summarily terminate an employee, the Appellate Division said that in this instance the requirement of a commercial driver's license is not "expressly stated. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 5:00 am
"Explaining that due process and fundamental fairness require that a qualification or requirement for employment must be expressly stated in order for an employer to bypass the protections afforded by the Civil Service Law or a collective bargaining agreement and summarily terminate an employee, the Appellate Division said that in this instance the requirement of a commercial driver's license is not "expressly stated. [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 5:56 pm
Thirty years later, however, on June 25, 2012, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Miller v. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 1:13 pm
The Sixth Circuit agreed this week to publish United States v. [read post]
