Search for: "HOPE v. STATE" Results 541 - 560 of 16,372
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Sep 2023, 12:18 pm by Tom Smith
They are clearly hoping to provide a constitutional fig leaf for far left activists who plan to sue any state that dares to include Trump on its 2024 presidential ballot. [read post]
4 Sep 2023, 12:00 pm by Annsley Merelle Ward
The EUIPO published The Baseline of Trade Secrets Litigation in the EU Member States in 2018. [read post]
3 Sep 2023, 9:43 am by Richard Hunt
She even abandoned this lawsuit when she feared she might lose, hoping to preserve her right to sue in the different courts that have allowed her to file suit. [read post]
3 Sep 2023, 12:23 am by Frank Cranmer
We hope to publish a full note later in the week. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 12:15 pm by Unknown
V, nos. 1-2 (Sept. 22 & March 2023)- Authors (2) = Lebanon (lead), ItalyDiamond OA:"Access and Politics of Higher Education for Refugees: Comparative Contexts from Uganda and Ethiopia," African Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 12, no. 2 (2023)- Authors (2) = South Africa (lead), Uganda"The Closure of the Brazilian-Venezuelan Border during the COVID-19 Pandemic: International Law Analysis of Ordinance No. 120 of March 2020," Revista Direito e Práxis, vol. 14,… [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 9:05 pm by Joe Katz
She points to an example outside of public health: the election law case of Shelby County v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 5:10 pm by Evan George
I asked the UCLA Emmett Institute’s Distinguished Counsel Mary Nichols to share her thoughts after reading the decision in Held v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 5:55 am by Patrick C. Toomey
Representative, and a state court judge; and even members of the public invited to the FBI’s Citizens Academy. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 5:00 am
# # #DECISIONMatter of People of the State of New York v Tyson Foods, Inc. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 10:50 am by Giles Peaker
 She then instructed solicitors ho made further representations, including that it had been held that the benefits cap “indirectly discriminated against women over men” (citing the Supreme Court decision in R (DA) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2019] UKSC 21, [2019] 1 WLR 3289). [read post]