Search for: "HAIR v. STATE"
Results 621 - 640
of 1,762
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Oct 2011, 12:09 pm
See United States v. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 6:00 am
The case is DeWolfe v. [read post]
6 Sep 2014, 4:08 am
The question arose from a discussion that he and Connecticut public defender Gideon had about an awful decision, State v. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 2:30 pm
V Dean E. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 1:16 pm
While the drawing was rough, it depicted Petitioner’s nipples, chest hair, pubic hair, penis, and testicles. [read post]
23 Dec 2018, 12:35 pm
In United States v. [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 9:30 am
Flanagan v. [read post]
25 May 2010, 10:11 am
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Today the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari review in Skinner v. [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 10:24 am
” Rankin v. [read post]
1 May 2013, 4:47 am
In doing so, the Court stated that, `a State has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch. [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 4:29 am
United States, an ineffective assistance of counsel case involving mandatory deportation, TC Heartland LLC v. [read post]
28 Jul 2017, 4:43 am
Clark, here, and First Amendment case Expressions Hair Design v. [read post]
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization: The Supreme Court Is No Safe Haven for Abortion Rights
9 Dec 2021, 9:01 pm
(Those procedures were just declared unconstitutional in a parallel state court case, Van Stean v. [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 8:06 am
Looking to the then-Fifth Circuit’s 1975 precedent in Willingham v. [read post]
9 Apr 2021, 10:01 pm
I would deny the application largely for the reasons stated in South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. [read post]
3 Feb 2007, 10:49 am
The state had a reasonable explanation for the lack of Wiccan religious services. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 6:24 am
Moreover, in Sutton v United Airlines, Inc, the Supreme Court stated that “an employer is free to decide that physical characteristics or medical conditions that do not rise to the level of an impairment — such as one’s height, build, or singing voice — are preferable to others, just as it is free to decide that some limiting, but not substantially limiting, impairments make individuals less than ideally suited for a job. [read post]
3 May 2016, 4:27 pm
As a side note, unfortunately the City of Perris v. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 6:22 am
” Vickers v. [read post]
