Search for: "State v. Levell "
Results 601 - 620
of 29,833
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2017, 5:17 am
Wade [LII materials] remain legal at the state level should the historical case be overturned. [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 2:50 am
CAAF decided United States v. [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 2:44 pm
Thanks to this recent New York Divorce and Family Law Blog post for reporting on the recent New York Appellate Division (intermediate level state appellate court) case of Martinez v. [read post]
19 Oct 2021, 1:01 pm
The groundbreaking Supreme Court of the United States case, NCAA v. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 9:00 pm
In Arizona v. [read post]
27 Apr 2008, 8:43 pm
This fact motivated a district judge in United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 6:24 am
The case is from the Amarillo Court of Appeals and is styled, State Farm Lloyds v. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 8:58 am
That said, the level of scrutiny must account for states’ wide latitude in implementing their voting systems, as well as the fact that disclosure does not itself prevent speech. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 9:19 am
Fleck v. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 5:30 pm
Earlier, a three-judge panel of the Circuit Court had extended the Second Amendment to the state, county and city level, through the Fourteenth Amendment. [read post]
31 Oct 2013, 8:15 am
United States v. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 5:41 am
Co. v. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 3:54 pm
The title of this post might seem to state the obvious, but in my experience, trial level and appellate courts seem all too eager to conclude that summary judgment is appropriate even where arguable issues of fact exist. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 7:08 pm
United States v. [read post]
26 Sep 2022, 5:00 am
In the case of State Farm Mut. [read post]
3 Jun 2020, 11:57 am
In United States v. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 9:29 am
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court in 14 Penn Plaza, LLC v. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 5:02 am
The outcome in Trump v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 12:00 am
Ass'n v. [read post]
31 May 2021, 11:00 pm
The Dusseldorf Regional Court put that Huawei v. [read post]