Search for: "Level v. State"
Results 6241 - 6260
of 29,839
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Feb 2023, 5:00 am
In the case of Skillman v. [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 4:28 pm
Notably, in 2010, the Supreme Court held in Samantar v. [read post]
4 Aug 2014, 6:23 am
However, the recent Supreme Court decision in Utility Regulatory Group v. [read post]
4 May 2013, 8:03 pm
In a setback to community health and the State of California's attempts to handle its budget issues by cutting back services to those most in need, a recent Court of Appeal decision, Mendocino Community Health Clinic v. [read post]
29 Jul 2012, 7:32 am
In Etienne v. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 11:26 am
Thus, in New York v. [read post]
11 May 2009, 5:44 pm
Here is the Abstract:Exxon Shipping Co. v. [read post]
2 May 2009, 3:51 am
Here is the abstract: Exxon Shipping Co. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 12:00 am
It offers a vast analytical overview of the diversity of the legal avenues used by states to govern migration. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 5:35 am
State v. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 5:38 pm
(The court cited the cases of Watson v. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 4:47 am
`Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level. . . . [read post]
7 Apr 2010, 2:55 pm
In today’s case (Hodgkins v. [read post]
19 Feb 2008, 9:16 am
Mississippi AG Jim Hood has developed quite a specialty in talking about things that are supposed to be secret, like his state grand jury investigations last year and the recent settlement in the State Farm v. [read post]
9 Jul 2018, 10:10 am
On June 22, 2018, in Carpenter v. [read post]
9 Jul 2018, 10:10 am
On June 22, 2018, in Carpenter v. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 3:23 pm
That kind of finding coming from the Court of Appeals is far more dramatic than the trial level decision in Vargas. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 3:23 pm
That kind of finding coming from the Court of Appeals is far more dramatic than the trial level decision in Vargas. [read post]
27 Jun 2009, 12:40 pm
Mark v. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 3:58 am
As Lord Brown said, he did not see any scope for these orders, for “levelling the playing field” or “providing equality of arms” between the parties. [read post]
