Search for: "State v. Billings"
Results 7421 - 7440
of 19,726
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jul 2023, 1:25 am
Co. v. [read post]
11 May 2010, 3:34 am
In State v. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 8:42 am
”Concluding that collective bargaining over police disciplinary matters was prohibited, without exception, Supreme Court found that PERB's decision was affected by an error of law and granted the City’s petition challenging PERB’s ruling.The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s holding, explaining that “Although strong state public policy favors collective bargaining, there exists a "competing policy … favoring strong disciplinary… [read post]
23 May 2023, 12:58 am
Interim findings of an independent analysis commissioned by the BSC department “suggest that there may be significant gaps were the Bill to proceed in its current form. [read post]
10 Jun 2010, 11:51 am
” Better Courts Now complains that Roe v. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 8:09 am
The Florida Supreme Court ruling in Coleman v. [read post]
10 May 2012, 7:15 am
Williamson v. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 5:34 am
Parino v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 2:31 pm
See Stanger v. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 6:55 am
The last bill is an interesting tax measure involving “grantor trusts” that deserves its own stand-alone post. [read post]
2 Aug 2022, 8:14 am
By Eric SegallIn the iconic case Marbury v. [read post]
1 Oct 2024, 6:03 pm
This comes following the 2022 Supreme Court of the United States decision to strike down affirmative action in STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. [read post]
18 May 2014, 9:01 pm
In 1943, the Court in West Virginia State Board of Education v. [read post]
14 Jul 2013, 10:59 am
The closest one finds is the 14th Amendment, except that it only authorizes penal legislation applicable to state actors, not to private persons generally, and the offenders in this case were not state actors.The authority cited for all of these charges is the Commerce Clause, interpreted as authorizing criminal penalties under the Necessary and Proper Clause, mainly based on the Supreme Court precedent in Wickard v. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 2:50 pm
But if the state can't prove that fact, then the statute does indeed violate the free speech rights of the LSAC. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 9:11 pm
” [Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Cato Supreme Court Review (PDF), earlier on Bond v. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 11:00 am
Escobar et al. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:16 am
” The United States v. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
And the bill is currently being considered in almost every if not literally every other state legislature. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 3:44 am
E.g., Roadway Express, Inc. v. [read post]
