Search for: "State v. Billings"
Results 5701 - 5720
of 19,726
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2011, 4:02 am
This suggests that in such situations the State may attempt to have the case dismissed on the grounds that it immune from suit in federal court for alleged violations of Title VII in view of the rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kimel v Board of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 and Alden v Maine, 527 U.S. 706, cases involving employees suing their state employer in federal court for alleged violations of, respectively, the Age Discrimination in… [read post]
6 Dec 2022, 9:44 am
When it did not pay its bills, data that was consequential to the litigation got deleted. [read post]
20 Aug 2024, 8:42 am
The court summarizes: The primary effect of the DPIA provision is to compel speech…The State cannot insulate a specific provision of law from a facial challenge under the First Amendment by bundling it with other, separate provisions that do not implicate the First Amendment The court also says that the DPIA requirement “deputizes covered businesses into serving as censors for the State” because the DPIA risk “factors require consideration of content or… [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 10:53 am
In Gersh v. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 6:30 am
The comp system has been around for years, sometimes triple-digit years in most states. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 2:31 am
A letter co-ordinated by the Anti-SLAPP Coalition to Justice Secretary Alex Chalk seeks an amendment to the anti-SLAPP bill making its way through Parliament. [read post]
11 Oct 2011, 5:06 am
And the overprinted bills are collector's items. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 3:00 am
A complete discussion in North Carolina would also need to include State v. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 4:00 am
As it stated at para. 7 of Vavilov, it had become clear that the simplicity and predictability promised by Dunsmuir v. [read post]
21 Feb 2013, 12:44 pm
For me, especially given the states’-rights orientation of the Anti-Federalists, who demanded the addition of the Bill of Rights, the best answer is the punishment meted out by the States. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 9:03 pm
United States v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 1:22 pm
House of Representatives approved the bill by a vote of 249 to 169. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 8:26 am
It also contained a number of limitations: Law No. 94-V does not extend to the collection of personal data for personal and family needs; the use of information for the Kazakhstani National Archive; the collection, processing, and protection of personal data related to Kazakhstani state secrets; or the use of information related to intelligence, counter-intelligence, and criminal activities, within legal limits. 5. [read post]
15 Dec 2009, 7:07 am
" State v. [read post]
22 Dec 2011, 8:36 pm
… The Pre-Action Protocol states that the issue of proceedings is a last resort. [read post]
15 May 2018, 4:19 am
The justices also held unanimously in United States v. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 3:30 pm
Until the decision in Howell v. [read post]
27 Apr 2016, 10:38 am
Tim Towarak (Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act – Subsistence Rights) State Courts Bulletinhttp://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2016state.htmlKitras v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 1:12 pm
The relevant constitutional provision, however, states that “bills” of attainder must not be “passed” – that is, by Congress. [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 5:35 am
The New York Times’ Adam Liptak covers United States v. [read post]
