Search for: "MARTIN v. STATE"
Results 621 - 640
of 4,054
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Dec 2019, 6:13 am
On October 1, 2019, plaintiffs in Brackeen v. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 4:00 am
On Thursday a 4-3 majority in the Mississippi Supreme Court issued a doozy of an opinion in Martin v. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 11:14 am
United States v. [read post]
22 May 2011, 6:31 am
State v. [read post]
21 Apr 2013, 8:04 pm
Take for example the case of Soriano v. [read post]
24 Apr 2011, 6:40 am
Martin, 2011 U.S. [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 2:42 pm
City of Philadelphia (Injury in fact standing doctrine) Martin v. [read post]
26 Jan 2012, 7:36 am
Bradford Currier, Marc Martin, and Marty Stern A federal appellate court recently upheld regulatory timetables for state and local governments to act on siting applications to build cell towers. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 5:00 am
Article written by Martin Goetz... [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 9:02 am
FERRACUTI, stating a date of first use of 1977. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 2:49 pm
(At least until it took two solid hours, and fifteen different attempts, to execute the last guy, at which point the Arizona governor put a moratorium on executions, until the state figures out how to actually "humanely" kill someone.) [read post]
19 Jul 2023, 1:42 pm
Martin (Tribal Leadership) U.S. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 7:23 am
International Justice, Wild West v. [read post]
27 Jan 2019, 10:02 am
James Martin tweeting a sort of this story. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 7:35 am
Although the technical issue of whether Section 2241 is available in a particular case (in lieu of Section 2254) often carries dispositive significance, see Martin v. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 4:42 pm
ShareThe Supreme Court heard oral argument on Monday in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. [read post]
12 Dec 2011, 12:12 pm
Green Harbour Homeowner's Ass'n, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Aug 2018, 6:28 am
Here's how Martin v. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 6:07 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Jun 2012, 1:39 pm
Bradford Currier and Marc Martin The Federal Communications Commission failed to provide television broadcasters with fair notice that airing “fleeting” expletives and nudity could result in indecency fines and enforcement actions, according to the recent Supreme Court decision in FCC v. [read post]
