Search for: "Battle v. State"
Results 7981 - 8000
of 8,263
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Nov 2007, 9:00 pm
May Shelley v. [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 4:03 pm
Bill Dahlin reports on the Supreme Court decision invalidating a collective bargaining agreement which gives preference to state employees over private engineers as a violation of Proposition 35, which the voters passed as a measure to protect the right of the state to contract with private entities for architectural and engineering services:On November 5, 2007, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in the Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of California, Inc.… [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 3:06 pm
In Mel Goldstein, et al. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2007, 1:28 am
Slip-N-Slide Records, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2007, 7:41 am
Maryland or Brown v. [read post]
6 Nov 2007, 9:50 pm
Maryland or Brown v. [read post]
4 Nov 2007, 8:33 pm
" State v. [read post]
4 Nov 2007, 8:33 pm
" State v. [read post]
1 Nov 2007, 1:32 pm
The Supreme Court briefing is now complete in Riegel v. [read post]
29 Oct 2007, 7:03 am
Salinas v. [read post]
26 Oct 2007, 8:31 am
See United States v. [read post]
25 Oct 2007, 7:53 pm
Research Paper Series, Paper No. 03-22), available at [ssrn.com]. 3 Id. 4 American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. [read post]
25 Oct 2007, 12:50 pm
Roe v Wade's trimester is one good example, and its stability became an open question after years of apparent precedential force. [read post]
24 Oct 2007, 7:04 pm
Specifically, in February 2007, in the San Manuel Indian v. [read post]
24 Oct 2007, 3:48 pm
As the courtroom saga unfolds, M&A players and practitioners should keep a watchful eye – not since In re IBP Inc. v. [read post]
24 Oct 2007, 12:05 pm
It was only the second case in history, after United States v. [read post]
21 Oct 2007, 11:00 pm
Tuttle, Ball on a Needle: Hein V. [read post]
18 Oct 2007, 4:47 am
Reporting on yesterday's Court of Appeals opinion in the case of City of Carmel, IN. v. [read post]
17 Oct 2007, 12:31 am
Thomas Barnett has stated that "the antitrust laws are enforced to protect consumers by protecting competition, and not competitors. [read post]
