Search for: "High v State"
Results 8261 - 8280
of 35,521
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jun 2011, 8:26 am
Our Court of Appeal has released their reasons in the appeal of L.M.M. v. [read post]
23 Apr 2010, 1:13 pm
Johnell Porter appealed his convictions for a list of crimes in relation to a robbery committed in York County (The State v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 4:20 pm
Previously we noted, here and here, the First Circuit case of Kosilek v. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 1:39 pm
In a pro-business decision, the Los Angeles Superior Court Appellate Division recently established state standards for damages and standing for California public accessibility cases in Mundy v. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 5:00 am
This balance was sorely tested in a meticulously analyzed decision in United States v. [read post]
27 May 2010, 10:27 am
Lewis v. [read post]
6 Oct 2007, 11:35 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 6:30 am
In Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 12:59 pm
The recent case of Cameron Moon v. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 12:59 pm
The recent case of Cameron Moon v. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 12:59 pm
The recent case of Cameron Moon v. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 12:59 pm
The recent case of Cameron Moon v. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 4:08 am
Commil USA v. [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 2:08 am
Pereira, a social worker, was terminated after making remarks that she, herself, described as a stupid, racist, and unthinking joke.While citing a line of cases that included Pickering v Board of Education, 31 U.S. 563, and Connick v Meyers, 461 U.S. 138, 1983, the Massachusetts high court said that although a public employee’s speech may be entitled to constitutional protection if the employee speaks out on a matter of public concern, and his or her interests as a… [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 8:03 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
12 Sep 2021, 8:15 am
Background In March 2018, the United States Supreme Court held in Cyan, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 10:14 am
Thus, in R (Elias) v Secretary of State for Defence [2006] 1 WLR 3213 para 165 provides that in discrimination cases there should be a structured approach to the question of justification: “First, is the objective sufficiently important to justify limiting a fundamental right? [read post]
29 Jul 2021, 8:04 am
(“Chemours v. [read post]
15 Mar 2012, 12:57 pm
O'Neil v. [read post]
