Search for: "State v. Parks" Results 721 - 740 of 11,234
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Dec 2015, 4:19 pm
 But grabs two out-of-state cases to say that it should count as battery. [read post]
10 Feb 2010, 8:44 am by Tarunabh Khaitan
The Delhi High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of Manushi Sangathan v. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 1:26 am by Anita Davies
There is some authority on this point from the United States. [read post]
11 Nov 2008, 5:26 pm
Solicitor General Daryl Joseffer for the United States as amicus. [read post]
11 May 2011, 1:33 pm by WIMS
The Appeals Court explains that the National Park Service and the United States Forest Service require backpackers who visit certain areas in the Sierras to store food in portable bear-resistant containers. [read post]
11 May 2011, 1:33 pm by WIMS
The Appeals Court explains that the National Park Service and the United States Forest Service require backpackers who visit certain areas in the Sierras to store food in portable bear-resistant containers. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 4:26 pm by Bryan Thompson
The 2nd District Appellate Court recently found in People v. [read post]
19 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"Further, opined the Appellate Division, a local law limiting the issuance of on-street parking permits to residents of that street is rationally related to the legitimate governmental purpose of alleviating an on-street parking shortage on that street.Citing Village of Willowbrook v Olech, 528 US 562, the Appellate Division also rejected Plaintiff's claim that Plaintiff is a "class of one" for purposes of prosecuting an equal protection claim,… [read post]
19 Aug 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
"Further, opined the Appellate Division, a local law limiting the issuance of on-street parking permits to residents of that street is rationally related to the legitimate governmental purpose of alleviating an on-street parking shortage on that street.Citing Village of Willowbrook v Olech, 528 US 562, the Appellate Division also rejected Plaintiff's claim that Plaintiff is a "class of one" for purposes of prosecuting an equal protection claim,… [read post]