Search for: "Treat v. White" Results 41 - 60 of 2,557
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
For the Balkinization symposium on Robert Post,  The Taft Court: Making Law for a Divided Nation, 1921–1930 (Cambridge University Press, 2024).Edward A. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 2:51 pm by Parks, Chesin & Walbert
A key part of her case was comparator evidence; namely, that two similarly situated white Juvenile Justice employees had faced similar problems but were treated very differently. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 2:01 pm by Melody McDonald Lanier
“You are all in for a treat,” VS Partner Tiffany Burks told the firm’s attorneys and staff as she introduced her esteemed guests on Wednesday. [read post]
18 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Post cites a letter from William Allen White as an illustration of the "innocent confidence of progressives. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 7:39 pm by Mark Graber
 The specter of Dunning School history haunted oral argument in Anderson v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 10:59 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Same result with Ghirardelli “classic white chips” that don’t have any white chocolate. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing see Harrington v City of New York, 157 AD3d 582, the Appellate Division said although Plaintiff's claim "sufficiently pleaded the first two [the four required] elements of discrimination, i.e. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing see Harrington v City of New York, 157 AD3d 582, the Appellate Division said although Plaintiff's claim "sufficiently pleaded the first two [the four required] elements of discrimination, i.e. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 7:54 pm by Josh Blackman
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman] On January 18, Professor Akhil Reed Amar and Professor Vikram Amar filed an amicus brief in Trump v. [read post]
25 Jan 2024, 12:53 am by David Pocklington
Initially, the Deputy Chancellor determined that three had a sufficient interest to be treated as objectors for the purposes of rule 10.2. [read post]