Search for: "Kennedy v State" Results 5961 - 5980 of 7,338
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Feb 2011, 9:38 am by Jeff Gamso
  (And please, don't just listen to the State Bar of Texas that proposed them and thinks they're the bee's knees because, frankly it's hard to see just why even when they try to explain it.)If you're unsure, read what Texas lawyers Mark Bennett and Paul Kennedy have to say. [read post]
2 Aug 2017, 7:08 am by David LaBahn
As Justice Anthony Kennedy cautioned in City of Ontario v. [read post]
31 Dec 2008, 2:57 am
Case Name: Williams Production RMT Co. v. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 2:27 am by INFORRM
  Kennedy v National Trust for Scotland, heard 25 and 26 July 2018 (Sharp, Asplin LJJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
12 Jul 2018, 5:06 am by Edith Roberts
” At American Thinker, Deborah La Fetra maintains that the “Gift Clause[s]” in state constitutions would prevent states from enacting “workarounds” to the court’s recent decision in Janus v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 4:19 pm by Caleb Trotter
” Even if the government’s stated interests were sufficient to satisfy scrutiny under Central Hudson, Kennedy’s concurring opinion stated that he would apply Sorrell v. [read post]
3 Apr 2018, 9:03 am by Adam Feldman
The only sitting justice with an opinion in this figure is Justice Anthony Kennedy with his opinion in TBS v. [read post]
7 Apr 2025, 10:33 am by Dr. Adam Feldman
Her recent vote in Department of State v. [read post]
17 Mar 2019, 5:35 pm by INFORRM
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 3:27 pm by Giles Peaker
” This broadly mirrored the case law, notably, R v Brent LBC, ex p. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 8:30 pm by Deepak Gupta
So a lot of people are denying their opportunity to come before the court.Circuit City v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 11:05 am by Lyle Denniston
Feldman thus became the first by a federal court to reject a constitutional challenge since the Justices’ decision in United States v. [read post]