Search for: "DAVIS v. CALIFORNIA" Results 41 - 60 of 1,302
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Apr 2020, 7:31 am by John Elwood
Davis, 19-6156 Issue: Whether Randy Halprin’s second federal petition raising a judicial bias claim is “second or successive” under 28 U.S.C. [read post]
25 Mar 2020, 10:41 am by John Elwood
The Supreme Court summarily reversed in Davis v. [read post]
19 Mar 2020, 6:22 am by John Elwood
(relisted after the February 21, February 28 and March 6 conferences)   Davis v. [read post]
13 Mar 2020, 5:05 am by SHG
What this meant is that colleges didn’t subject themselves to liability to the accuser by imposing a lesser remedy than expulsion, and that the circuit was emphasizing a return to the criteria stated by the Supreme Court in Davis v. [read post]
3 Mar 2020, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Although the Second Circuit may have gotten to the right legal result (given the constraints under which lower courts operate), there is one aspect of its reasoning that I believe reflects a common and dangerous misunderstanding (an overreading, actually) of the highly contested Obamacare ruling, National Federation of Independent Business v. [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 2:16 pm by fvanloon
” Hasenkrug answers: “The material for this research is obtained from natural or induced abortions from females in California. [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 6:53 am by Andrew Hamm
State Bar of California should be overruled and “integrated bar” arrangements like Wisconsin’s invalidated under the First Amendment. [read post]
2 Jan 2020, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
This might explain some of what the Supreme Court said and did in the 1993 decision in Nixon v. [read post]
27 Dec 2019, 7:55 am
” This overbroad formulation is a far cry from the definition set forth by the Supreme Court in Davis v. [read post]
26 Dec 2019, 12:37 pm
  And a massive investment of resources that results in (1) two lengthy opinions by the California Supreme Court (in 2005 and 2006); (2) a 146-page opinion by the Central District on habeas, and (3) a 318-page opinion by the Southern District on habeas (in 2013).And now, in 2019, another lengthy opinion. [read post]
16 Dec 2019, 2:50 am by Jonathan Glasson QC
In the High Court, Sir Robert Nelson concluded that the claim for California surrogacy expenses had to fail because he was bound by Briody v St Helens and Knowsley Area Health Authority [2001] EWCA Civ 1010, [2002] QB 856 on this issue. [read post]