Search for: "STATE, EX REL. v. Miller"
Results 61 - 80
of 156
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Mar 2008, 5:27 am
Ex Rel. [read post]
27 Jun 2015, 2:50 pm
Would that be reviewable by a court, given that it involves a question of the validity to state law? [read post]
28 Mar 2010, 8:33 pm
United States ex rel. [read post]
19 Dec 2020, 8:22 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 4:27 pm
(North Carolina ex rel. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 4:42 am
" Nay ex. rel. [read post]
28 Oct 2024, 5:09 pm
”) This would seem to overturn United States ex rel. [read post]
29 Jun 2023, 7:49 am
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. [read post]
29 Jun 2023, 7:49 am
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2022, 5:52 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
19 Dec 2021, 8:16 pm
United States ex rel. [read post]
24 Jan 2020, 11:19 am
In the 1864 case of Gelpke v. [read post]
Takeaways From the Facebook Threat and Title VII Head Scarf Cases Handed Down by the Court This Week
3 Jun 2015, 9:01 pm
United States and EEOC v. [read post]
2 Nov 2012, 11:58 am
” United States ex rel. [read post]
29 Mar 2016, 6:46 am
App. 1998); In re Marcus S., 638 A.2d 1158, 1159 (Maine 1994); State ex rel. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 7:03 am
Other states have similar, recent decisions [see Western Millwork v. [read post]
9 Nov 2014, 6:46 pm
Ex parte United States, 242 U.S. 27, 37 S.Ct. 72, 61 L.Ed. 129 (1916). [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm
The measure had been contentious in D.C. before it was sent out to the states—each house of the U.S. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 6:30 am
First, there is a lot of new material regarding the “loyal denominator” issue (see here and here): whether the former Confederate states were to be included in the Article V total of states of which three fourths were required to ratify an amendment, or whether (as I think) only three fourths of the states represented in Congress were required, because rebel states’ Article V naysaying power, like their Article I right to be… [read post]
15 Jul 2018, 9:01 pm
’” (I have written in academic scholarship that the Hawke Court reached the right result because Ohio’s ratification was already communicated to DC and could not be undone, but not because the word “legislature” should be read to forbid the use of the referendum device.)In two other important cases from the first half of the twentieth century, Ohio ex. rel. [read post]
