Search for: "STATE V. POWERS" Results 7301 - 7320 of 41,391
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Mar 2007, 6:00 am
From a UCL standpoint, this is the most interesting paragraph in the opinion: In the UCL context, in Spielholz[v. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 5:16 am by Ashley Deeks, Matthew Waxman
The Supreme Court has offered snippets of its view on this in some cases, stating in Fleming v. [read post]
19 May 2016, 1:23 pm by Alex Loomis
Madison stated: “By the constitution of the United States, the president is invested with certain important political powers, in the exercise of which he is to use his own discretion, and is accountable only to his country in his political character and to his own conscience. [read post]
6 Jan 2022, 6:31 am by Don Asher
  As for Lockout-Tagout duties for employers in specific industries or lines of work, see the following federal regulations:  Marine Terminals (1917 Subpart C); Longshoring (1918 Subpart G); General Construction- Electrical (1926 Subpart K); Concrete and Masonry Construction (1926 Subpart Q); Electric Power Transmission and Distribution (1926 Subpart V); Electrical (1910 Subpart S), Special Industries (1910 Subpart R), and Electric Power Generation, Transmission… [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 3:38 am by Mathew Purchase, Matrix.
At paragraph 134, it stated that: “It will be for the Respondent state to implement . . . appropriate general and/or individual measures to fulfil its obligations to secure the rights of the applications and other persons in their position to respect for their private life. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 9:08 pm by Lyle Denniston
” The case is sufficiently different from Hill v. [read post]
9 May 2017, 7:30 am by Josh Blackman
The “presumption of regularity” that attaches to all federal officials’ actions, United States v. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 12:23 pm by Lyle Denniston
” The decision relied in significant part upon the Supreme Court’s 1974 decision in United States v. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 4:15 pm by INFORRM
The basis of the order requiring Facebook to identify TVO was the decision of the House of Lords in Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133, [1973] UKHL 6 (26 June 1973); but it “is a power which for good reasons must be sparingly used” (Megaleasing v Barrett (No 2) [1993] ILRM 497, 503 (Finlay CJ). [read post]