Search for: "Murphy v. State"
Results 861 - 880
of 2,101
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Dec 2015, 12:36 pm
Murphy v. [read post]
5 Nov 2017, 10:40 am
Murphy, (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1280–81).) [read post]
11 Sep 2007, 11:59 am
Murphy, 331 F.3d 1062, 1067 (9th Cir. 2003) (citing Williams v. [read post]
16 Feb 2023, 5:30 am
Much of this shift can be traced back to a single Supreme Court decision: Murphy v. [read post]
5 Dec 2006, 8:37 am
In an en banc ruling today in US v. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 11:21 pm
In Kirby v. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 7:45 am
In Arlington v. [read post]
5 Jan 2016, 6:08 am
Carroll, PhD2; Julia Murphy, DVM3 Canine rabies virus variant has been eliminated in the United States and multiple other countries. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 9:41 am
Murphy, 548 U.S. 291 (2006). [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 3:40 pm
Aug. 14, 2023). [7] See Mobil Oil Corp. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 4:54 pm
Anthony List v. [read post]
31 Oct 2008, 9:31 pm
Court" and then published this analysis: REST BREAK AND MEAL PERIOD CLAIMS AFTER MURPHY V. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 1:33 pm
” In 2007, the California Supreme Court held that the hour of additional pay for missed meal or rest breaks is not a penalty but a premium wage that compensates employees (Murphy v. [read post]
15 Apr 2022, 4:55 am
Applying well- established econometric techniques, we first examine the Tenth Circuit’s Murphy v. [read post]
20 Mar 2020, 6:00 am
Georgia declared implementing the Supreme Court’s decision in Chisholm v. [read post]
11 Sep 2008, 5:21 am
Aceves, Murphy v. [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 5:29 am
Updated |NS v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Principles of Community law) [2011] EUECJ C-493/10 (22 September 2011) - read opinion The Common European Asylum System was designed to establish a fair and effective distribution of the burden on the asylum systems of the EU Member States. [read post]
17 Nov 2023, 6:31 am
Murphy with Mr. [read post]
15 May 2023, 9:43 am
In Knight v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 5:41 am
The William Murphy precedent is not “obscure”—it has merely been obscured by a plurality of the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. [read post]