Search for: "State v. Light" Results 7541 - 7560 of 28,966
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2011, 2:15 pm by Dwight Sullivan
CAAF’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
16 Jul 2018, 2:01 pm by Michael Baudinet
In January, this blog previewed the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in Lagos v. [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 10:46 am by Kevin Smith
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated an award of summary judgment for the defendants in Abrams v. [read post]
22 Jun 2007, 10:40 am
On Thursday, June 21, 2007, the United States Supreme Court handed down an important decision (Rita v. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm by NL
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that planning authorities could… [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm by NL
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that planning authorities could… [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 2:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
” But on a separate issue, he did not state a False Claims Act whistleblower retaliation claim against individual town officials because a 2009 amendment did not expand the FCA to provide individual liability (Howell v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 7:44 am by Kent Scheidegger
Thompson , were sent back to circuits divisible by three for reconsideration in light of Greene v. [read post]