Search for: "US Constitution Petition"
Results 8061 - 8080
of 12,694
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jan 2012, 11:42 am
A court asked to decide a question of statutory or constitutional law that affects the outcome of an already held election is injected in the worst way into the political thicket. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 6:26 am
That brings us back to the question with which we started. [read post]
9 Dec 2021, 8:20 am
The Appellate Court rejected this claim, noting that in Horn the California Supreme Court held that Constitutional rights to notice and hearing apply to land use decisions which substantially affect the property rights of owners of adjacent parcels, not agency decisions having only de minimus effect on land. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 12:12 pm
Generally, the owner of immovable property has the right to use the property as he pleases, but the owner’s right may be limited if the use causes damage to neighbors. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 7:49 pm
Politics is rough and tumble, and if you’re signing ballot petitions, you should expect some criticism. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 10:45 am
It may file a delisting petition. [read post]
8 Aug 2023, 3:47 pm
If so, copies of the power(s) of attorney must be attached to the petition. [read post]
11 Oct 2021, 4:18 am
by Dennis Crouch US Inventor Inc. v. [read post]
6 Nov 2019, 11:30 am
Oracle America, Inc., 18-956 [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in this case.]Issues: (1) Whether copyright protection extends to a software interface; and (2) whether, as the jury found, the petitioner’s use of a software interface in the context of creating a new computer program constitutes fair use. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 7:27 am
It will be incumbent upon the court called upon to hear such petitions to order solely those measures strictly necessary to preserve the rights involved. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 4:30 am
The applicable Montana statute, The Montana Seat Belt Use Act, states that evidence of compliance or non-compliance with the mandatory seat belt law is not admissible “in any civil action for personal injury or property damage resulting from the use or operation of a motor vehicle,” and failure to comply with the seat belt use law does not constitute negligence. [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 8:56 am
Thus, a ruling – such as Johnson – under the Constitution’s Due Process Clauses, may still be “substantive” in its effect. [read post]
7 Jan 2013, 2:18 pm
The Missouri court blocked prosecutors from using the sample they had ordered taken in this case, but said the prosecution on a drunk-driving charge could go ahead with evidence not obtained in violation of the Constitution. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 11:34 am
Mantello, No. 05-0731 Judgment denying a petition for habeas relief is affirmed where the trial court did not unreasonably apply clearly established Supreme Court precedent in rejecting defendant's claim that his exclusion from the courtroom during a pre-trial conference violated his constitutional rights U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, April 09, 2008 US v. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 9:03 pm
Years ago, however, it formally gave the state of California the right to use that portion of the highway as a public road — technically, the state was granted a “use easement. [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 7:47 am
I do not "defend" sex offenders, but am against unconstitutional and far-reaching laws, which trample on US citizens constitutional and God given rights. [read post]
17 May 2008, 7:59 am
"Jerry" Brown was scrutinizing petitions submitted by two organizations in support of an initiative to amend the California Constitution to add the following provision: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 3:46 pm
§ 2244(b) if the petitioner could have challenged his previous sentence on the same constitutional grounds. [read post]
5 Jun 2015, 7:32 am
He declared that the denial of cert. in that case reflected “insufficient respect to the State of Arizona, its voters, and its Constitution,” and that the Court’s “indifference to cases such as this one will only embolden the lower courts to reject state laws on questionable constitutional grounds. [read post]
30 Jul 2011, 4:52 am
It therefore constituted a contempt under the strict liability rule. [read post]
