Search for: "State v. Light" Results 5921 - 5940 of 28,965
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Feb 2020, 8:28 am by David Pozen
  If the E.R.A. rescissions are overlooked for purposes of counting to 38, then it becomes harder to deny that the four recent rescissions of Article V applications can be overlooked for purposes of counting to 34—putting us on the brink of our first-ever Article V convention.The puzzles don’t end there. [read post]
For more information and for a review of the latest changes to state laws, please check out Seyfarth Shaw’s 2019-2020 edition of its 50 State Desktop Reference. [read post]
26 Feb 2020, 9:41 am by Yi W. Stewart
Rather than acknowledging a fiduciary’s consent as “lawful consent” under the federal statute (id.; see Ajemian v Yahoo! [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 11:09 am by Amy Howe
But in 2017, after hearing oral argument in the family’s case for the first time, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the lower courts for them to reconsider in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Ziglar v. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 6:09 am by Thalia Kruger
In the case O.C.I. and others v Romania, one of the questions was whether there is such a thing as light violence that does not amount to a grave risk in the sense of Article 13(1)(b) of the Hague Convention. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 12:33 pm by Amy Howe
United States, the justices turned down a request to decide whether to overrule the court’s 2005 decision in National Cable Telecommunications Association v. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 10:03 am by Nathaniel Sobel
About a month after the robbery, state law enforcement officials obtained a geofence warrant from a state magistrate judge. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 3:35 am by Dave
But, as I put to Mr Evans and he appeared to accept, there is a difference between stating these generalities in a policy and proving that, notwithstanding reasonable steps having been taken to secure suitable alternative accommodation in a particular case, this is not proved possible in a period of two years and will not be in the near future. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 3:35 am by Dave
But, as I put to Mr Evans and he appeared to accept, there is a difference between stating these generalities in a policy and proving that, notwithstanding reasonable steps having been taken to secure suitable alternative accommodation in a particular case, this is not proved possible in a period of two years and will not be in the near future. [read post]
22 Feb 2020, 11:25 am
  This states that unless relating to issue estoppel, decisions of tribunals and inquiries are not admissible in other civil proceedings. [read post]