Search for: "Arizona Supreme Court"
Results 5801 - 5820
of 9,057
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2007, 2:50 pm
Arizona (1966); Katz v. [read post]
18 May 2007, 2:50 pm
Arizona (1966); Katz v. [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 3:35 am
According to the judge, the Arizona Supreme Court’s policy is that a previously purchased vacation plane ticket isn’t sufficient cause to continue a trial. [read post]
6 Sep 2020, 12:28 pm
Arizona AFPD J. [read post]
25 Oct 2020, 12:55 pm
Image of counsel August Gugelmann and Mary McNamara from https://www.beaumontenterprise.com/crime/article/Oakland-man-who-pleaded-guilty-to-terror-charges-15668554.php#photo-15886933.Image of the Honorable Judge Andrew Hurwitz fromhttp://cronkitenewsonline.com/2012/03/arizona-supreme-court-justice-moves-closer-to-federal-judgeship/index.html Steven Kalar, Federal Public Defender N.D. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 8:46 am
And Slate finishes out its twelve-part series reviewing the Supreme Court’s Term, featuring commentary and analysis by Dahlia Lithwick, Paul Clement, and Walter Dellinger. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 12:30 pm
The most important election case decided while Ginsburg sat on the Supreme Court was Bush v. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 3:59 am
Briefly: In a column for Bloomberg View, Stephen Carter speculates on why the Supreme Court appears to be “all but leak-proof. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 6:33 am
But the Court’s post-CU decision in Arizona Free Enterprise v. [read post]
27 Jan 2009, 5:00 am
The majority opinion drew a sharp dissent, and it will either be appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, or go back to the Maricopa County, Arizona Superior Court for further proceedings (or, of course, it may be settled).Is this type of case just an "informed consent" case: i.e., if the "informed consent" had been broader, there would be no viable claims? [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 7:04 pm
It's always perilous to try and generalize about a Supreme Court Term. [read post]
23 Oct 2020, 3:00 am
Supreme Court instructed it to reevaluate the House’s subpoena power. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 7:30 am
” At first blush, it’s hard to tell which is the more accurate view of Justice Scalia’s sharply worded and sarcastic dissent from the Supreme Court’s decision Tuesday in Martinez v. [read post]
29 Sep 2023, 12:30 pm
And speaking of the Supreme Court: For the latest edition of the Short Circuit podcast, we head over to Stanford Law School to visit with some friends at the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic there. [read post]
23 Sep 2022, 4:00 am
Supreme Court decision on whether the First Amendment protects tech companies’ editorial discretion or forbids its censorship of unpopular views. [read post]
13 Apr 2012, 9:30 am
Here are a few photos from Tuesday’s hearing at the Supreme Court regarding the ethics charges against three lawyers: Andrew Thomas, Lisa Aubuchon and Rachel Alexander. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 6:27 am
Now, on to the leading legal headlines from Wise Law on Twitter: Legal sector loses 1400 jobs in August GoDaddy outage takes down thousands of websites Ontario dad wants option of pulling kids out of class based on religious beliefs - Calgary Herald Arizona Supreme Court rules tattooing is constitutionally protected free speech How the new Anti-Spam Act will affect your business Players' union attempts to block NHL lockout in Alberta, Quebec Too Big… [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:02 pm
, Politico, Nov. 9, 2011 Super-Soft Money: How Justice Kennedy paved the way for ‘SuperPACS’ and the return of soft money, Slate, Oct. 25, 2012 The Arizona Campaign Finance Law: The Surprisingly Good News in the Supreme Court’s New Decision, The New Republic (online), June 27, 2011 New York City as a Model? [read post]
29 Aug 2010, 7:02 am
In light of the United States Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v Gant, 556 U.S. ___, 129 S Ct 1710, 173 L Ed 2d 485 (2009), which abrogated the well-established rule in New York v Belton, 453 U.S. 454; 101 S Ct 2860; 69 L Ed 2d 768 (1981) and its progeny, we must consider whether an officer's good faith reliance on case law that is later overturned may form a proper basis to avoid the operation of the exclusionary rule. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 3:07 am
The claims were presented then to the state supreme court. [read post]
