Search for: "State v. South"
Results 721 - 740
of 10,958
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Aug 2013, 1:41 pm
(Order at 3).The Court reviewed that Branham v. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 2:28 pm
-v-LAWRENCE E. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 9:00 pm
The trend actually started in the wake of the ACLU’s nationwide public records requests on location tracking and the 2013 U.S. v. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 12:01 am
(South Carolina) (holding the proper measure of compensation is the difference between the land unencumbered by a railroad easement and the land encumbered by an easement for recreational trail use and railbanking); Geneva Rock Products, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 2:47 pm
In South Dakota v. [read post]
30 Jan 2007, 2:49 pm
DeMaria (Charleston, South Carolina)TennesseeVirgin v. [read post]
22 May 2007, 6:30 pm
See State v. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 4:20 am
SCOTUSblog reports on developments.Meanwhile, the state of Louisiana filed a petition for certiorari (full text) in Robicheaux v. [read post]
11 Jan 2010, 3:22 am
Sapp v. [read post]
14 Mar 2018, 11:45 am
For the Oregon hypothetical, the solicitor general explains that states never have immunity in the courts of the other states, pointing to the Supreme Court’s 1979 decision in Nevada v. [read post]
3 May 2007, 10:32 am
United States (Petition, BIO, Reply). [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 6:42 am
In United States v. [read post]
6 Jan 2016, 6:09 am
Reis v. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 7:16 am
In State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. [read post]
3 May 2012, 8:01 am
Ferrer, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida; John V. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 6:24 am
He is a world-renowned Taekwondo coach, currently working for one of the best Taekwondo teams in South Korea. [read post]
16 Oct 2007, 10:27 am
Seven (7) North Carolina State University students named as "John Does" have joined together, in LaFace v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 11:01 am
SOUTH DAKOTA v. [read post]
6 May 2011, 6:43 am
From the District of South Carolina comes another decision holding that Padilla is a “new rule” as per Teague v. [read post]
