Search for: "House v. State"
Results 8361 - 8380
of 25,472
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Dec 2007, 11:14 am
Tanis v. [read post]
14 Jan 2018, 6:34 pm
., Appellant, v. [read post]
23 Jul 2013, 12:00 am
Plus this interpretation has the weight of precedent: EFF successfully argued in Apple v. [read post]
21 Apr 2013, 11:37 am
This would create in state habeas law a remedy for lawyers' failure to advised their clients of collateral consequences, following a recent SCOTUS precedent on-point in Padilla v. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 1:18 pm
The case is Chanel Inc. v. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 3:59 am
Two rulings by state courts illustrate this point, Croman v City University of New York, 277 AD2d 185, and Parisi v NYC Housing Authority, Appellate Division, First Department, 269 AD2d 210. [read post]
22 Mar 2006, 5:21 am
In United States v. [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 8:56 am
In United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 9:21 am
A typical lump sum price was required for one portion of the project (the pump house and a few other items). [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 9:34 am
This funding would only need to be repaid if Islington's housing stock was transferred to a housing association. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 9:34 am
This funding would only need to be repaid if Islington's housing stock was transferred to a housing association. [read post]
13 Jun 2007, 3:02 am
Bogan v. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 2:24 pm
Supreme Court case, Burwell v. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 2:24 pm
Supreme Court case, Burwell v. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 2:24 pm
Supreme Court case, Burwell v. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 7:18 am
[recognizing cell phone searches typically reveal far more private information to the police than most house searches]; Missouri v. [read post]
19 Mar 2020, 9:55 am
State v. [read post]
28 Jul 2008, 1:16 pm
People v. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 10:53 am
The question here, though, was whether the bedroom tax policy is “manifestly without reasonable foundation” because the bedroom tax involved a question of high policy – the Secretary of State relied on Humphreys v HMRC [2012] 1 WLR 1545, which, in turn, had applied Stec v UK (2006) 43 EHRR 1017 to argue for a different test depending on the ground of discrimination and the type of policy. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 2:00 am
State v. [read post]
