Search for: "Works v. State"
Results 8181 - 8200
of 60,521
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jun 2014, 1:59 pm
Following the completion of fact discovery, the court selected Sweet v. [read post]
21 Jun 2008, 3:16 pm
Marty asks whether this provision violates the principles of United States v. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 8:36 am
Of course, there really wasn't a drug checkpoint as the United State Supreme Court ruled that such checkpoints are illegal in City of Indianapolis v. [read post]
22 Dec 2013, 11:22 am
The notice stated:“Under section 12(2) of the Housing Act 2004, the Council requires you to carry out the works specified in the schedule attached to this Notice and to begin them not later than the 3rd day of May 2011 (being not less than 28 days from the date of this Notice) and to complete them by the 31st July 2011. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 12:06 pm
Co., 274 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2000]; Yankelevitz v Royal Globe Ins. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 12:42 pm
Yesterday, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued an incredibly troubling decision in the case of State v. [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 8:23 pm
Sanchez Valle (Ginsburg, J., concurring); and (2) whether, as this court has previously suggested, the “separate sovereigns” exception at least should be inapplicable when state and federal prosecutors have worked so closely together that they are “in essential fact” one entity, Bartkus v. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 9:00 am
According to the Act’s legislative history, as the state supreme court noted in Iskanian v. [read post]
11 May 2007, 5:29 am
Sovereign immunity applies to the state, legislators, prosecutors, judges, and others doing essential work for the state and it is absolute.B. [read post]
10 Feb 2010, 6:15 pm
Here is the abstract: In a recent case, Virginia v. [read post]
17 Jul 2011, 7:19 am
More evidence that courts are tightening up on multi-state FLSA collective actions comes from Vasquez v. [read post]
22 Sep 2015, 12:08 pm
But, not surprisingly, one that doesn't work. [read post]
1 Jul 2015, 4:11 pm
The following is a guest post by Connecticut Senior Assistant State's Attorney Harry Weller, commenting on Justice Breyer's dissenting opinion in Glossip v. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 9:09 am
State regulation of employee wages, hours and working conditions is remedial legislation for the benefit of the state’s workforce. [read post]
19 May 2018, 12:09 pm
It would have been preferable to give the Apple v. [read post]
18 Nov 2020, 7:09 am
In Sanchez v. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 2:48 pm
Co. v. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 8:15 pm
The DPIC has this recent item discussing the details of the 20 executions in months since the Supreme Court "resolved" the constitutionality of lethal injection protocols through its decision in Baze v. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 3:30 am
Louis and the Violent History of the United States. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 2:32 pm
But, they are required by law to do so under a United States Supreme Court case, Brady v. [read post]
