Search for: "Fair v. State"
Results 7981 - 8000
of 27,418
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Nov 2008, 10:14 am
First National State Bank of New Jersey, 87 N.J. 163, 75-76 (1981). [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
By our count, federal judges have trampled over state sovereignty with respect to the heeding presumption in no fewer than eleven states – Alaska, Colorado (despite contrary state-court authority), Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, New York (despite contrary state-court authority), South Dakota, and Wyoming.Finally, because various states have taken quite different approaches to whether a heeding presumption exists at all and… [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 10:35 am
Lowery v. [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 1:18 pm
Here's what the Court of Appeal says about it:"In Property Reserve v. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 12:18 pm
However, caselaw confirms that welfare is still ‘a primary consideration’ (ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] 2 AC 166, [2011] UKSC 4), so it’s going to be a pretty important factor in any consideration of publication, and in many cases it will be determinative. [read post]
25 Aug 2014, 5:40 am
After a jury convicted Christopher Castillo “of making a threat to injure or kill the President of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S. [read post]
29 Nov 2006, 5:05 am
In Stenberg v. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 9:51 am
In Bush v. [read post]
31 May 2012, 7:20 am
Texas has stated that it considers black and Latino students “under-represented” at the university, based in part on their proportions in the state population. [read post]
17 Nov 2018, 12:10 pm
In part, the amici correctly identified the experimental milieu in which Fisher worked, but the description of Fisher’s work is neither accurate nor fair. [read post]
8 Aug 2024, 6:00 am
"More fundamentally, preclusive effect is limited to only those 'issues that were actually litigated, squarely addressed and specifically decided' " (Church v New York State Thruway Auth., 16 AD3d 808, 810 [3d Dept 2005], quoting Ross v Medical Liab. [read post]
8 Aug 2024, 6:00 am
"More fundamentally, preclusive effect is limited to only those 'issues that were actually litigated, squarely addressed and specifically decided' " (Church v New York State Thruway Auth., 16 AD3d 808, 810 [3d Dept 2005], quoting Ross v Medical Liab. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:32 pm
Shawn Minihan won in State v. [read post]
1 Nov 2024, 2:41 am
Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. [read post]
15 Mar 2014, 5:12 pm
The court in United States v. [read post]
29 May 2012, 8:17 am
See Schaefer-LaRose v. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 12:48 pm
Starbucks Corporation (S234969) on whether California wage and hour law recognizes the de minimis doctrine established by the United States Supreme Court in Anderson v. [read post]
26 Oct 2014, 8:23 pm
Consideration of Hamdi v. [read post]
28 Aug 2010, 12:55 pm
Salamea v. [read post]
10 Jan 2020, 6:47 pm
Now it's fair to say that the states may not have had adequate notice of this distinction prior to the 1978 ERA extension. [read post]
