Search for: "HOPE v. STATE"
Results 6081 - 6100
of 14,628
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jun 2012, 7:12 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 3:53 am
Supreme Court with briefs that they hope will help convince the justices to nix a California law targeting donors,” urging the court in 22 separate submissions to review Americans for Prosperity v. [read post]
1 May 2016, 9:01 pm
I was lead counsel in Rasul v. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 6:45 pm
Mere conclusions, expressions of hope or unsubstantiated allegations or assertions are insufficient" to overcome a motion for summary judgment (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]; Prudential Home Mtge, Co., Inc. v Cermele, 226 AD2d 357, 357-358 [2d Dept 1996]). [read post]
23 Jan 2009, 1:49 am
Part V. [read post]
18 Aug 2019, 3:41 am
In the ensuing case, United States v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 1:11 pm
The Utah case, titled Herbert v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 1:25 pm
The court did not, however, give McWilliams everything he had hoped for. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 1:47 pm
"I'm in that sense a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas," she added.If legal issues arise again in tonight's VP debate, I hope Governor Palin will keep talking up federalism principles. [read post]
10 Jan 2015, 9:34 pm
Oxford Investments, LP v City of Philadelphia, 21 F. [read post]
28 May 2010, 7:53 am
V. v. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 6:00 pm
Diaz v. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 5:16 am
Those of us who hoped that Bryant would bring clarity to the constitutional standard have been disappointed. [read post]
3 May 2022, 4:30 am
In the balance of today's essay, I'll discuss a hypothesis first floated by Professor Stephen Vladeck and reported by the NY Times last month: perhaps the Biden administration is hoping that once the mandate expires of its own force (as it will tomorrow), the case will be moot; then, invoking the Munsingwear mootness doctrine (named for the 1950 SCOTUS case of United States v. [read post]
21 Aug 2011, 9:32 pm
Wiley, of course, interpreted "lawfully made under this title" to mean "lawfully made in the United States". [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 5:21 pm
Those hoping that the Black and Banro decisions would clarify the test for assuming jurisdiction in multi-state defamation actions, particularly, those which give rise to internet defamation, will be met with disappointment. [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 7:34 am
Aditya Bamzai, of Ortiz v. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 11:59 am
Young, 13-95 (asking whether a state can forfeit application of the Stone v. [read post]
10 Jul 2020, 11:35 am
The Court’s ruling yesterday in McGirt v. [read post]
13 Jul 2015, 10:40 am
” In any other year, King v. [read post]
