Search for: "State v. Money"
Results 5781 - 5800
of 20,506
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2017, 2:18 pm
So why not just exclude them on both sides and save the money? [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 9:01 pm
Co. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 10:52 am
Lopez and United States v. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 8:23 am
State v. [read post]
16 Sep 2015, 10:00 am
This case is being prosecuted by Assistant Attorney General Philip V. [read post]
8 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm
Fong v. [read post]
10 Nov 2023, 5:21 am
They say they get their money as follows: "Oregon Law Center receives revenue from a variety of sources, including state court filing fees, Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Accounts (IOLTA), the Lawyers’ Campaign for Equal Justice (CEJ), federal and state grants, private foundations, and attorneys’ fees. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 5:38 am
"The case is 13-cv-05693, Flo & Eddie Inc. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 7:48 am
This case is dismissed.The case is Ray v. [read post]
11 Apr 2013, 7:00 am
In Stocker v. [read post]
29 Oct 2013, 7:35 am
I'm holding some papers in the ABC v. [read post]
10 Aug 2019, 8:22 am
On the other hand, the United States had been holding that money improperly. [read post]
21 Jul 2009, 12:37 pm
In Garcetti v. [read post]
13 Jan 2022, 1:45 pm
In Biden v. [read post]
26 Jun 2024, 2:57 pm
Vullo, which addressed similar indirect coercion by New York state officials. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:26 am
It is said that it should have applied the approach in Galloway v Telegraph ([2006] EWCA Civ 17) and should only have overturned the judge’s decision on balancing conflicting Convention rights if it was “plainly wrong”. [read post]
7 Mar 2007, 12:23 pm
Jack Balkin in this post neatly cuts right to what I think is the interesting question at the heart of the Court's pending Establishment Clause case, Hein v. [read post]
18 Nov 2022, 4:32 pm
Specifically, to get the money, the States had to certify that they would comply with the Act's "Offset Provision. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 3:45 am
Plaintiffs also argue that they stated a claim under Judiciary Law § 487 (2), which provides that recovery may be had when an attorney “[w]ilfully delays [the] client’s suit with a view to his [or her] own gain; or wilfully receives any money or allowance for or on account of any money which he [or she] has not laid out, or becomes answerable for. [read post]
1 Apr 2007, 8:09 am
Indianapolis Star columnist Dan Carpenter has an important column today on the Indiana Supreme Court's Feb. 22nd decision in the case of Lambert v. [read post]
