Search for: "State v. Law"
Results 7081 - 7100
of 173,904
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Oct 2023, 10:00 am
The case, Martinez v. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 8:27 am
” The Second Amendment returns to the Supreme Court Less than two years after their landmark decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 7:01 am
B.L., and People v. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 6:09 am
The case is Khan v. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 5:59 am
The new complaint also argues the rules are prohibited by NSMIA and preempted by ERISA (SIFMA v. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 4:18 am
Co. v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 10:26 pm
That right might therefore be overridden by a state body, provided there was a sufficiently pressing need to do so for one of the purposes in Article 9(2) and the means used were both lawful and proportionate, applying the four-stage proportionality test in Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) (SC(E)) [2014] AC 700 [at 20] and allowing the state body an appropriate discretionary area of judgment. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 9:01 pm
SeeEisner v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 7:17 pm
Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc., 770 F.2d 399, 407 (4th Cir. 1985) and United States v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 6:08 pm
In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 6:08 pm
In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 4:44 pm
Nicklin J stated that “(i) The statement must be recognisable as comment, as distinct from an imputation of fact. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 4:29 pm
To be sure, the purpose of the IFR is to seek to comply with a 2021 Supreme Court decision, United States v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 4:24 pm
States Too Cautious? [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 2:14 pm
See, e.g., Socko v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 1:09 pm
” SEC v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 12:11 pm
The Form devised by the IRS doesn’t help the situation. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f709.pdf Under state laws, property belongs to the person who is the named owner until there is a divorce. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 8:00 am
., LLC, doing business as “Library Hotel,” is said to have violated federal law because it refused to accommodate a disabled employee (who suffered from musculoskeletal impairments) because it declined that individual’s request to sit at a stool while working at the front desk and also refused a request to limit walking.Faced with those impediments, the employee was reportedly compelled to resign.Believing that such conduct violated the ADA, the United States… [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 6:39 am
State v. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 6:38 am
In Tapis International v INS , 94 F. [read post]
