Search for: "Strong v. State"
Results 5961 - 5980
of 14,242
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Dec 2023, 9:01 pm
In the 2021 case of United States v. [read post]
3 Nov 2014, 5:12 am
That sentiment is particularly strong in the Third Circuit. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 5:17 am
Hill v. [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 7:00 am
EDENBAUM, D.M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. [read post]
16 Feb 2022, 10:07 am
See U.S. v. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 2:08 pm
In balancing these two rights, Tugendhat J had in mind the “ultimate balancing test” as referred to by Lord Steyn Re S (A Child) [2005] 1 AC 593 (at para 17) and guidance from Lord Bingham in R v Shayler [2003] 1 AC 247 (at para 26) that interference of the ECHR right must not be stricter than necessary to achieve the state’s legitimate aim. [read post]
28 Feb 2015, 9:04 pm
The oral arguments in King v. [read post]
21 Apr 2023, 4:41 pm
Indeed, no reported California state court decision has endorsed the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning, and we are of the view that California courts “have been clear in their expression that section 16600 represents a strong public policy of the state which should not be diluted by judicial fiat. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 2:23 pm
Indeed, no reported California state court decision has endorsed the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning, and we are of the view that California courts “have been clear in their expression that section 16600 represents a strong public policy of the state which should not be diluted by judicial fiat. [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 9:06 pm
Indeed, no reported California state court decision has endorsed the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning, and we are of the view that California courts “have been clear in their expression that section 16600 represents a strong public policy of the state which should not be diluted by judicial fiat. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 5:43 am
In a mundane lens, this is a somewhat unsurprising application of the notoriously conservative Article 42.5 test refined in the “PKU” case, North Western Health Board v. [read post]
1 Oct 2007, 2:34 am
(In another case, US v. [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 10:30 am
More on Ledell Lee v. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 3:52 am
Here the issue concerned Lekkas’ lack of license to practice medicine in New York State although he had been appointed to the position of Assistant Clinical Physician with a State agency. [read post]
7 Aug 2024, 9:29 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2020, 10:14 am
State v. [read post]
6 Dec 2017, 2:26 pm
D. v. [read post]
11 Apr 2015, 7:19 am
Norris, 16 U.S.C.M.A. 574, 37 C.M.R. 194 (to be admissible, must be verbatim); United States v. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 10:49 am
The court followed Georgia (State Farm v. [read post]
