Search for: "State v. Long."
Results 7021 - 7040
of 51,506
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 May 2016, 5:42 pm
I know of only one case where the government dismissed a claim under 3730(c)(2)(a): US ex rel Roach v. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 6:17 am
That case, Stoyas v. [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 5:55 am
The news report seems to suggest that this position was arrived at only through a strong presumption of marriage in case of proven long cohabitation, rather than accepting that they are different categories that need to be treated similarly.Given the politically volatile nature of family laws, the courts has generally been cautious in applying modern constitutional principles to these laws (particularly the infamous State of Bombay v. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 11:03 am
I'm sorry it has been a long time since I last rapped at ya. [read post]
20 May 2021, 2:30 am
The claimants argued that, reliant on M v Newham [2020] EWHC 32, the duty was immediate, unqualified and non-deferrable. [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 11:56 am
” The Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 5:19 pm
Long Haul Inc., et al., v. [read post]
22 Mar 2013, 8:00 am
Plaintiffs assert a variety of state and federal law claims. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 11:17 am
Caperton v. [read post]
23 Sep 2010, 8:37 am
For example, in 1986 the California Supreme Court held in Long Beach City Employees Association v. [read post]
24 May 2018, 10:00 am
Only extraordinary defensive measures, including “extreme vetting” of would-be immigrants, a ban on Muslims entering the United States, and a 2,000-mile-long wall along the nation’s southern border could repel the encroaching hordes. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 9:39 am
Arguments in Carachuri-Rosendo v. [read post]
5 May 2023, 1:48 pm
This foolish disparity should not go unnoticed, nor (in the long run) uncorrected. [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 7:09 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Apr 2011, 11:42 am
The matter of Rubin v. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 8:33 am
State Farm:Professor Swan, RIP. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 12:53 pm
A federal court of appeals declined to extend the long-standing consent decree in litigation known as DNC v. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 10:54 am
This position, which the dissenters agreed with, means that even the most patently pretextual assertion that a state was attempting to protect a woman’s health by restricting access to abortion would be constitutional as long as the restriction itself did not place a substantial obstacle in the face of a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion. [read post]
21 Sep 2008, 5:25 pm
A week from tomorrow, on September 29, 2008, the United States Supreme Court will convene for what is known as the "long conference. [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 8:12 am
See also State v. [read post]
