Search for: "State v. Law"
Results 8041 - 8060
of 155,373
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Nov 2022, 4:00 am
The only available legislative history states that the law at issue was amended in 1950 “to protect the health of the people. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 1:10 pm
Although the United States Supreme Court at one time interpreted the clause to bar admission of out-of-court statements that lacked adequate indicia of reliability (Ohio v. [read post]
26 Feb 2021, 1:45 am
Rather, unless there is an issue as to whether the Secretary of State has acted in breach of his obligations under has the Human Rights Act, SIAC is confined to reviewing the Secretary of State’s decision by applying essentially the same principles that apply in administrative law. [read post]
9 Apr 2013, 12:11 pm
Apocalypse Now: The Unrelenting Assault on Morton v. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 9:13 pm
Shirley V. [read post]
19 Feb 2013, 11:54 am
In a San Diego, California, case, AF Holdings v. [read post]
28 May 2013, 12:31 pm
Hood v. [read post]
23 Apr 2013, 9:03 pm
This posting was written by Jody Coultas, Contributor to Wolters Kluwer Antitrust Law Daily.A gun dealer failed to state Sherman Act, Section 1 or Lanham Act commercial disparagement claims against the Village of Norridge, Illinois, stemming from a change in an ordinance that may force the gun dealer to close up shop, according to the federal district court in Chicago (Kole v. [read post]
28 May 2024, 2:20 am
Contents include:Articles Ka Lok Yip, Military Alliances under International Law Thanapat Chatinakrob, Interplay of International Law and Cyberspace: State Sovereignty Violation, Extraterritorial Effects, and the Paradigm of Cyber Sovereignty Seyfullah Hasar, Recognition of Governments and the Case of the Taliban Yunqing Liu, Revisiting the Customary International Law Avenue: Immunity of State Officials of Non-Party States in the… [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 12:28 pm
Touhy v. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 6:53 am
United States, 293 F. 1013 (DC 1923)—or the foundation rule set by the state Court of Appeals in Parker v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 11:00 am
In Gray v. [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 3:00 pm
This event is sponsored by the Georgetown Law Supreme Court Institute, The Ohio State University Election Law@Moritz and the AEI-Brookings Election Reform Project. [read post]
24 Mar 2019, 6:56 pm
There are umpteen judgments which state that courts would not decide how tender conditions should be framed [See, for instance, Directorate Of Education v. [read post]
6 Aug 2022, 12:18 pm
The book covers three general topics: 1) Church/State Law (issues arising under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and statutes such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act); 2) Religious Law (the role and substance of law in various religious traditions); and 3) Comparative Law and Religion (the law relating to religious freedom in other countries). [read post]
4 Mar 2017, 7:11 am
Madison --Cooper v. [read post]
15 Jun 2018, 8:09 am
Federal Courts Bulletinhttp://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2018.htmlUnited States v. [read post]
1 Apr 2013, 3:53 pm
The question in the case is whether, under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV and the dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, a state may preclude citizens of other states from enjoying the same right of access to public records that the state affords its own citizens.To discuss the case, we have Christopher Green, who is a professor at the University of Mississippi School of Law and currently visiting… [read post]
1 Apr 2013, 3:53 pm
The question in the case is whether, under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV and the dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, a state may preclude citizens of other states from enjoying the same right of access to public records that the state affords its own citizens.To discuss the case, we have Christopher Green, who is a professor at the University of Mississippi School of Law and currently visiting… [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 1:17 pm
Jewell (termination of lease)New York v. [read post]
