Search for: "District of Columbia v. Little"
Results 621 - 640
of 1,103
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Mar 2010, 1:37 pm
Maple Ridge (District) (1992), 71 B.C.L.R. (2d) 68, 17 B.C.A.C. 172 (C.A.) at p. [read post]
30 Jul 2011, 7:15 pm
I first encountered Loving v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 3:20 pm
The Supreme Court concluded in District of Columbia v Heller, 554 US 570 (2008), that “arms” refers to “weapons of offence, or armour of defence,” or “any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another,” id at 647 (quotation marks and citations omitted)—terms that cover more than just guns. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 4:50 am
Very little. [read post]
25 May 2021, 2:55 am
There is little justification for states to bring international income into their tax bases. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 5:01 am
See Columbia Hous. [read post]
Opinion analysis: Federal “use of force” encompasses reckless domestic violence misdemeanor offenses
27 Jun 2016, 6:08 pm
Justice Kagan then goes on to note that when Congress enacted Section 922(g)(g) in 1996, thirty-four states and the District of Columbia included “reckless” infliction of physical harm in their misdemeanor assault statutes. [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 10:58 am
Other jurisdictions, such as Kentucky and the District of Columbia, confuse the issue even more where case law suggests continued employment may be sufficient consideration for mid-stream non-competes if the employee remains employed for a significant amount of time or the at-will relationship is otherwise altered in some way. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 5:30 pm
See generally Bexis' book §2.04[1] at footnote 17 (collecting state-of-the-art citations from drug and device cases in 35 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico).So that's one thing - one pretty big thing - that we think is wrong with the anti-preemption rationale in Tucker II. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 11:58 am
Inc. v. [read post]
20 Jan 2022, 2:01 pm
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected these claims on the ground that the Constitution’s speech-or-debate clause prohibits judicial review of legislative actions such as voting. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 5:45 am
Key Findings Following the 2018 South Dakota v. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 1:28 pm
” Sorrell v. [read post]
18 Jan 2007, 10:48 am
Kelly (1976) 17 Cal.3d 24, the California Supreme Court adopted the standard set forth in the District of Columbia Circuit's decision in Frye v. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 7:10 am
In another case, a federal court in the District of Columbia found that the denial of an EPA scientist’s “unusual and extraordinary request” to work remotely for two years to care for his mother was not an adverse action. [read post]
16 Jun 2020, 5:14 am
” Indeed, prior to Little Rock, Eisenhower had been reluctant to lend federal muscle to desegregation efforts in the South in the years following the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 5:30 am
Although they differ slightly in their particulars, they have the same basic structure: Both bills would allow a Special Counsel terminated under §600.7(d) to challenge his termination before a “three-judge” D.C. district court (which would include two federal district judges for the District of Columbia and one judge from the U.S. [read post]
25 Oct 2018, 9:00 am
Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran—a case referenced during floor debate on ATCA and in its associated House Report—a federal district court in the District of Columbia concluded that rocket attacks that Hezbollah launched against Israel pursued during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict constituted an “act occurring in the course of ... an armed conflict between military forces of any origin. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 12:44 pm
What is likely to be the last word occurred on November 13, when Madigan signed on to an amicus brief filed by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and joined by nineteen other states and the District of Columbia. [read post]
5 Nov 2015, 6:00 am
Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. [read post]
