Search for: "White v State" Results 621 - 640 of 12,386
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jul 2017, 7:51 am by Steve Lash
Welcome to Monday, the 43rd anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. [read post]
6 Jun 2006, 10:44 am
Here is a link to a Topeka Capital-Journal article (registration required) reporting that the Defender Project won a new trial from Judge Hood in State v. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 5:23 pm by site admin
Ferguson the Supreme Court of the United States held that a Louisiana statute mandating separate but (in reality not) equal railway accommodations for black and white passengers did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. [...] [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 2:02 am
Judge White begins by stating the importance of the First Amendment issues in play: The First Amendment encompasses the "right to receive information and ideas. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 6:36 am
On February 22, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jan 2010, 3:17 am
Applying the “the preponderance of the evidence standard” in an administrative disciplinary actionWilliams v Nicoletti, 295 A.D.2d 353City of White Plains motor equipment operator Robert Williams held a New York State Commercial Driver's License. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 3:20 pm by Kurt Opsahl
Judge White of the Northern District of California just issued an order granting the government's motion for partial summary judgment in Jewel v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 2:28 am by sally
Supreme Court Inveresk plc v Papermakers Ltd [2010] UKSC 19 (05 May 2010) Farstad Supply AS v Enviroco Ltd [2010] UKSC 18 (05 May 2010) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) White & Ors v The Crown [2010] EWCA Crim 978 (05 May 2010) Cooper, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 979 (05 May 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Brookes v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 420 (29 April 2010) Durham Tees Valley… [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 2:33 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The Court held that it was irrelevant, in the Essop case, that some older or BME candidates could pass the Core Skills Assessment in question, and it was discriminatory as the proportion who could pass was smaller than the proportion of white or younger candidates. [read post]