Search for: "Matter of Jonathan R. v Michael R." Results 41 - 60 of 173
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Feb 2016, 4:36 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
One possibility, suggested by Michael Greve, is that the court was concerned about a replay of Michigan v. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 8:17 am
Tuesday afternoon I had the pleasure of debating/discussing King v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 3:31 pm
As a matter of doctrine, the NFIB decision is not on point. [read post]
26 Oct 2020, 7:39 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
During her confirmation hearings, Senate Democrats suggested Justice Barrett should recuse from election litigation, and former judge Michael Luttig wrote an op-ed arguing Justice Barrett may be obligated to recuse under the Supreme Court's decision in Caperton v. [read post]
26 May 2015, 2:08 pm
Justice Elena Kagan made the same point in her opinion last year in Michigan v. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 9:34 am
Jonathan Rosenberg, counsel for EA, tried to answer this question, though he seemed quite confused. [read post]
26 Oct 2020, 7:39 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
During her confirmation hearings, Senate Democrats suggested Justice Barrett should recuse from election litigation, and former judge Michael Luttig wrote an op-ed arguing Justice Barrett may be obligated to recuse under the Supreme Court's decision in Caperton v. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
The other day, I was blogging about tags, and somebody asked what are all the tags. [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 9:46 pm by Steve Bainbridge
Winter, Paying Lawyers, Empowering Prosecutors, and Protecting Managers: Raising the Cost of Capital in America, 42 Duke L.J. 945, 948 (1993) (in derivative actions, “plaintiffs are generally figureheads”); Jonathan R. [read post]
24 May 2022, 6:07 am by David Pocklington
Jonathan Chaplin, Theos: Democratic deliberation and deep diversity: “What it would take to debate assisted dying honestly”. (30 September 2021). [read post]