Search for: "State of South Carolina v. I. C. C" Results 41 - 60 of 344
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Feb 2015, 10:33 am by Mack Sperling
  The alleged misrepresentations were that the Pacific Fund owned various properties in high-end residential communities on the South Carolina coast. [read post]
20 Oct 2014, 5:46 am
" Failure to allow this evidence can result in reversible error, as the Court of Appeals of South Carolina held in State v. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 6:42 pm by Dwight Sullivan
Exhibit D is described as “a heavily redacted transcript of testimony from an apparently completely public criminal proceeding in South Carolina. [read post]
28 May 2024, 10:03 am by Michael C. Dorf
South Carolina State Conf. of the NAACP (reversing a lower court judgment that had invalidated South Carolina's electoral map on the ground that it was racially gerrymandered to undercut Black voting strength). [read post]
22 May 2007, 6:30 pm
§ 16-3-655(C)(I)(2006 Supp). [read post]
21 Feb 2017, 7:19 am by Bill Marler
  An exclusion request must include your name and address, stateI request exclusion from the Hardee’s HEP-A Settlement in Spartanburg County, SC”, be signed by you or your legal representative, and be mailed to: Spartanburg Hep-A Class Exclusions c/o The Notice Company P. [read post]
27 Oct 2012, 2:46 pm by Jack Pringle
State of South Carolina, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals considered for the first time the issue of whether a state's lawsuit pursuing claims that may benefit some of its citizens is a "mass action" under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 ("CAFA").BACKGROUNDThe State of South Carolina brought separate actions against Defendants AU Optronics and LG Display (citizens of states other than… [read post]
24 Oct 2023, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
In language strikingly reminiscent of South Carolina’s stance in the nullification crisis of the early 1830s, the viewpoint of the states that attempted to secede during the Civil War, and the Southern Manifesto that defiantly asserted the constitutionality of Jim Crow in the 1950s, SAPA purports to nullify various federal statutes claimed to conflict with a tendentiously extreme version of the Second Amendment. [read post]