Search for: "Lay v. Lay"
Results 6281 - 6300
of 7,492
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jul 2011, 5:01 am
The classic “commuting expenses are not deductible” axiom meets the case of the “Commuting Cops” and one of my favorite cases that I have my students read, Margaret Green v. [read post]
11 Nov 2007, 1:15 am
"The lay of the land is that essentially everyone is waiting for the Supreme Court. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 3:00 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Sep 2022, 6:42 am
Tex.) handed down an opinion in Stella Immanuel v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 2:33 pm
Anna's case, or Stern v. [read post]
15 Jun 2017, 8:20 am
Even since the landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. [read post]
22 Sep 2017, 10:54 pm
The SJC decision stems from a February 2013 arrest by state police of a driver who was stopped for allegedly driving with his head lights off; the name of the case is Commonwealth v. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 11:39 am
Based on the California Supreme Court’s holding in Neighbors for Smart Rail v. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 1:16 pm
After about nine weeks of opportunity to work out a majority one way or the other to decide the case of United States v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 9:00 pm
Dans un délai d'1 mois à compter de la publication de la mention de la délivrance, le titulaire devra indiquer à l'OEB s'il souhaite un brevet "à effet unitaire". [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 5:26 pm
V. [read post]
19 Oct 2014, 9:01 pm
Another peculiarity is what happened during oral argument in Hamdan v. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 11:39 am
Based on the California Supreme Court’s holding in Neighbors for Smart Rail v. [read post]
31 Mar 2022, 5:00 am
In 1895, Congress sought to impose an income tax, but was stopped by the Supreme Court in Pollock v. [read post]
17 Jun 2013, 10:10 am
The decision in the case of Arizona v. [read post]
2 Nov 2015, 3:09 am
Anyone want to lay odds that, after the next decision by the trial court on the second remand, we’ll see a third trip to the Appellate Division? [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 11:10 am
Helmerich & Payne points to the Supreme Court’s 1946 decision in Bell v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 5:45 am
And in fact hot wax from an ear candle did hurt the plaintiff in Danaher v Wild Oats Markets, Inc., 2011 US Dist. [read post]
6 May 2017, 4:29 am
Though the court cites the highly speech-protective test from Brandenburg v. [read post]
17 May 2024, 9:05 pm
Schweber and Anderson explain that under the test established in Brandenburg v. [read post]
