Search for: "May v. State" Results 5641 - 5660 of 119,555
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jan 2009, 11:20 pm
The following is a reprint of a client advisory from last summer:On June 25, 2008, the United States Supreme Court in Exxon Shipping Company v. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 9:31 pm by Steven G. Pearl
Interestingly, in its introduction, the Court stated: "We hold the provision is unconscionable and unenforceable under Armendariz v. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 8:08 am
After several days of listening to attorneys for the State of Texas defend the state parole board's operations, he became exasperated by the testimony of a parole board lawyer. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 9:10 am by Associates and Bruce L. Scheiner
Taylor, Jan. 14, 2016, Washington State Supreme Court More Blog Entries: Samson v. [read post]
19 Oct 2014, 5:27 am
Essentially, patent holders may ‘treaty shop’ for the most favourable international investment agreement available: It may well be quite a number of such treaties that are binding upon UPCA Contracting Member States and that offer investor-state dispute settlement.This highlights the potential for international investment law and in particular its system of dispute settlement to interfere with national court decisions and other state measures… [read post]
20 Apr 2017, 6:55 am by Steve Vladeck
” Ultimately, “[t]o comport with due process, a State may not impose anything more than minimal procedures on the refund of exactions dependent upon a conviction subsequently invalidated. [read post]