Search for: "State v. So "
Results 7481 - 7500
of 116,395
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Feb 2010, 5:00 am
We are discussing Citizens United v. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 12:20 pm
On June 10, 2013, the United States Supreme Court decided Oxford Health Plans, LLC v. [read post]
4 Aug 2020, 12:00 am
Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176]. *** This case was decided with another case involving the same parties and is posted at http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2020/2020_04302.htm. [read post]
4 Aug 2020, 4:00 am
Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176]. *** This case was decided with another case involving the same parties and is posted at http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2020/2020_04302.htm. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 8:18 am
In United States v. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 1:44 pm
Watersheds Project v. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 5:54 am
EcoDisc Technology AG v. [read post]
15 Feb 2015, 12:59 pm
Additional Resources: Villaneuva v. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 9:30 am
To hold otherwise would make the Convention effectively directly enforceable as between private citizens so as to alter their contractual rights and obligations, whereas the purpose of the Convention is to protect citizens from having their rights infringed by the state [41]. [read post]
31 Jan 2024, 6:06 am
Finally, some may worry whether, even as it promises a “revolution in the enforcement of international human rights law,” the Court’s interpretation of “erga omnes partes” obligations so as to expand standing may place undue expectations on states &ndas [read post]
27 Jun 2009, 2:54 am
"The amended complaint is not (yet) available at the website of the San Francisco Superior Court, so it is unclear whether McCoy has somehow raised an equal-protection issue that the California Supreme Court has not already decided in Srauss v. [read post]
20 May 2016, 1:41 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Apr 2023, 12:10 pm
So if you think (as the voters do here) that it should be a violation of the Constitution for a state to only allow registered members of a party to vote in that party's primary, then by all means, feel free to make that argument.But the Supreme Court held back in 1990 that it was unconstitutional for states (like California) to require an open primary when that's not what the party wants. [read post]
9 May 2012, 1:40 pm
CARNIVAL CORPORATION, Defendant.Case No. 11-21697-CIV-UNGARO/TORRESUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA2012 U.S. [read post]
22 Feb 2018, 2:29 pm
United States and Beckles v. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 12:00 am
STATE v. [read post]
4 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm
For example, in each of the year’s two blockbuster cases—one expanding gun rights (New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
16 Feb 2022, 7:01 am
to see if it could find some soft spot in Georgia state law. [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 8:00 am
In SEC v. [read post]
