Search for: "State v. White" Results 6661 - 6680 of 11,825
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jul 2017, 11:30 am by Smita Ghosh
”In the London Review of Books, Andrew Bacevich covers The General v. the President: MacArthur and Truman at the Brink of Nuclear War by H.W. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing see Harrington v City of New York, 157 AD3d 582, the Appellate Division said although Plaintiff's claim "sufficiently pleaded the first two [the four required] elements of discrimination, i.e. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing see Harrington v City of New York, 157 AD3d 582, the Appellate Division said although Plaintiff's claim "sufficiently pleaded the first two [the four required] elements of discrimination, i.e. [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 10:59 am by Tom Kosakowski
 The new policy was prompted in part by an investigation by Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights and a report by the California State Auditor.The policy states in relevant parts:H. [read post]
22 Oct 2015, 5:32 am
BGW challenged that registration, on the basis of its own earlier German word and figurative mark, this being a black-and-white version of the pretty little green mark that appears at the top right-hand corner of this blogpost. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 12:50 pm by Adam Levitin
Last week the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey issued an opinion in a case captioned Kemp v. [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 3:45 am by Russ Bensing
Wegner… In State v. [read post]
9 Aug 2023, 4:18 am by Eric Segall
United States, in which the Could upheld the forced relocation of all people of Japanese descent on the West Coast just because of their ancestry. [read post]
28 Feb 2022, 9:34 am by Rebecca Tushnet
” Version of Health-Ade Plus with large yellowish white cross on yellowHealth-Ade plus with red cross on white backgroundBecerra v. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 2:24 pm
White, Illinois Secretary of State Issue: Whether a state's refusal to approve a "Choose Life" specialty license plate is content rather than viewpoint discrimination and violates the First Amendment and whether a specialty license plate program that grants authority to approve or reject new messages on plates is not facially invalid under the First Amendment if it vests that licensing authority in a legislative body. [read post]