Search for: "High v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 35,174
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 May 2024, 10:47 am
Pa.) in Monge v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 6:15 am
United States v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 2:00 am
In AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 10:15 pm
This includes documents recently disclosed as a result of the settlement of Penebaker v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 4:17 pm
The Canadian Supreme Court, in R v Simard, also rejected using lyrics as evidence. [read post]
14 May 2024, 2:46 pm
” Tennessee v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 7:15 am
”[14] ETC Designation for BIAS Providers: High Cost and Lifeline Support. [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am
[High School Students from Minnesota and New York argued before a panel of three federal judges and visited the United States Supreme Court.] [read post]
Blog Post: Practical Guidance Offers Help with Workplace Issues during Mental Health Awareness Month
13 May 2024, 10:00 pm
See Bradford v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 9:06 pm
” “In addition, this bill could further increase receipts to the State General Fund from civil penalties (ranging from $100 for a Class II violation up to $10,000 for a Class V violation), imposed on food sales establishments that violate the provisions of this bill. [read post]
13 May 2024, 12:57 am
On Thursday 16 May 2024 there will be an injunction application in the privacy case of Department for Education v Hercules KB-2024-000389 Reserved judgements Harrison v Cameron, heard 26 March 2024 (Steyn J) BW Legal Services Limited v Trustpilot, heard 7 March 2024 (HHJ Lewis) Unity Plus Healthcare Limited v Clay and others, heard 1 March 2024 (HHJ Lewis) Vince v Associated Newspapers, heard 19 February 2024 (HHJ Lewis) Pacini… [read post]
12 May 2024, 9:05 pm
ENDNOTE [1] Basic v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 9:05 pm
Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 10:38 am
The car owners in this case had argued that due process does give them a right to a prompt hearing under Mathews v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 7:35 am
[7] Maslowski et al. v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:39 am
La Rosa v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 11:30 am
Wade, Griswold v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:45 am
The case is Jamie Allen Harless v. [read post]
