Search for: "State v. Billings"
Results 6301 - 6320
of 19,726
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Mar 2010, 10:19 am
All other incorporated Bill of Rights guarantees are fully incorporated; indeed the operative principle is so-called "jot-for-jot" incorporation, by whic the scope of the right is identical whether asserted against the federal government or a state. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 7:07 am
State Bill Form of removal Target Reason for removal request Status Iowa HR 47 Impeachment Supreme Court Justice Brent Appel Same sex marriage decision Varnum v. [read post]
13 Jan 2023, 1:10 pm
Taylor v. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 3:50 pm
As the Sixth Circuit in United States v. [read post]
16 Mar 2017, 11:31 am
For example, a Feb. 16, 2017, article by Daniel Fisher in Forbes stated, “Rep. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 1:54 pm
County of Oneida (disposession of tribal lands), United States v. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Taylor Law amended to clarify an employee organization's duty of fair representation of non-members in a collective bargaining unit Section 209-a.2 of the Civil Service LawIn Janus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 138 SCt 2448, the Supreme Court held that "States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees. [read post]
22 Oct 2015, 4:42 am
Ohio’s Senate Bill 180, however, is drafted very differently. [read post]
8 May 2014, 8:37 am
Affirmed.Case Name: GILBERT ORTIZ, JR. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 11:01 pm
In 1978, the Illinois Supreme Court case of Green v. [read post]
5 Mar 2014, 9:05 am
Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKER’S COMPENSATION CLAIM OF: BENNIE JOHNSON v. [read post]
12 Jan 2014, 9:41 pm
It reversed and remand the case for further proceedings.Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 6:21 am
This case tells us how it all works.The case is Garraway v. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Taylor Law amended to clarify an employee organization's duty of fair representation of non-members in a collective bargaining unit Section 209-a.2 of the Civil Service LawIn Janus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 138 SCt 2448, the Supreme Court held that "States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 11:30 am
Murphy v. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 12:36 pm
Commentary on the four-four tie in United States v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 4:13 am
" Which brings us to Bloor v. [read post]
15 Feb 2009, 9:00 pm
U.S. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2016, 11:07 am
However, the bill provides an exception to preemption if, for instance, a state has received a waiver, or if the state regulatory law was passed before April 2016. [read post]
22 Jun 2016, 11:07 am
However, the bill provides an exception to preemption if, for instance, a state has received a waiver, or if the state regulatory law was passed before April 2016. [read post]
