Search for: "State v. Saide"
Results 7861 - 7880
of 57,127
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Apr 2024, 3:45 pm
Justice Barrett observes that immunity will protect the ex-President in his state court cases — where it is especially needed:Let me ask you about state prosecutions because, if the president has some kind of immunity that's implicit in Article II then that immunity would protect him in -- from state prosecutions as well. [read post]
5 Oct 2011, 5:56 am
The United States Supreme Court heard oral argument yesterday in Maples v. [read post]
12 May 2016, 4:00 am
(see Matter of Compasso v Sheriff of Sullivan County, 29 AD3d at 1065). [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 11:46 am
[A minor impact on gun laws but a potentially momentous shift in constitutional method] My contribution to a symposium on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 1:22 am
As the Supreme Court said in its 2007 global warming decision, Massachusetts v. [read post]
29 Apr 2021, 4:33 am
Google reviewed the relevant case law on CPR 19.6(1), arguing that the authorities (in particular, Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways plc [2011] Ch 345 and Rendlesham Estates plc. v Barr Ltd [2015] 1 WLR 3663) supported its position. [read post]
24 Jun 2015, 6:17 am
Clark (9th Cir.1990), overruled on other grounds by United States v. [read post]
8 Oct 2013, 10:25 pm
In 2008, the Supreme Court said in Kennedy v. [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 3:38 am
At paragraph 134, it stated that: “It will be for the Respondent state to implement . . . appropriate general and/or individual measures to fulfil its obligations to secure the rights of the applications and other persons in their position to respect for their private life. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 6:51 am
Jonathan Siegel at PrawfsBlawg notes that Bilski v. [read post]
3 Sep 2008, 1:53 pm
State and Dike v. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 5:04 pm
., has sued the United States government for infringement. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 5:09 am
In balancing these two rights, Tugendhat J had in mind the “ultimate balancing test” as referred to by Lord Steyn Re S (A Child) [2005] 1 AC 593 (at para 17) and guidance from Lord Bingham in R v Shayler [2003] 1 AC 247 (at para 26) that interference of the ECHR right must not be stricter than necessary to achieve the state’s legitimate aim. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 2:59 am
Kennedy v. [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 1:17 pm
The Appeals Court said, "Neither argument is persuasive. . . we deny BN's petition for review." [read post]
20 May 2013, 1:35 pm
The Appeals Court said, "The issue in this case is one of statutory interpretation. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 12:39 pm
The Appeals Court said, "Those motions now having been resolved, and entry of judgment in the Commercial Point litigation stipulated to, Boston Gas appeals on multiple grounds. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 12:44 pm
The Appeals Court said, "While the record supports some benefits to a natural wolf option, that is not what guides us. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 9:23 am
In Application of Inna Kharlamova v. [read post]
6 Feb 2007, 3:07 pm
Gaskill v. [read post]
