Search for: "Key v. State" Results 8101 - 8120 of 20,049
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jan 2008, 1:50 pm
McIlrath, No. 07-1266 Sentence for traveling across state lines to have sex with a minor is affirmed where: 1) remarks of the judge at sentencing discharged his duty to consider not only the sentencing guidelines, but [read post]
8 Feb 2022, 11:25 am by Dennis Crouch
One key decision is Shaw Industries Group, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 10:00 am by Dan Ernst
Although both lines ultimately trace back to Brandeis’ Coronado Oil dissent, this part demonstrates how the contemporary conflict effectively emerged out of a key debate between Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Thurgood Marshall in 1991’s Payne v. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 8:16 am by WIMS
Utility Air Regulatory Group (UTAG) v. [read post]
31 Jul 2015, 2:06 pm by Kenneth J. Vanko
Interestingly, the Court stated that "to some extent overbreadth is unavoidable given the imprecision of our language. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 7:06 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
A key difference between appeals in state and federal court is that in state court you can appeal any court ruling, even if the case is not even resolved. [read post]
28 Mar 2014, 8:34 am by WIMS
<> Analysis of Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification (EM&V) Reports: Residential Space Cooling and Commercial Lighting Measures - (Thu, 27 Mar 2014) New one-time analysis report is based on the rapidly growing data from evaluation, measurement, and verification (EM&V) reporting on the results of energy efficiency programs. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 4:29 am by Eric Segall
Such responsiveness is key to the very concept of self-governance through elected officials. [read post]
14 May 2015, 4:07 am
Assuming that the three main state organs are designed bearing in mind their key functions, such judicial interference in the administration requires specific justification. [read post]
8 Mar 2022, 6:20 am by John Jascob
” Indeed, the respondent sees no conflict among the circuits because they all agree that context is key to whether risk disclosures are materially false. [read post]