Search for: "STATE V. POWERS" Results 8861 - 8880 of 41,395
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Nov 2010, 1:06 pm by Daniel Thies - Guest
For all the complexity of the statute at issue in United States v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 9:17 am by Miriam Seifter
  In a concurring opinion in Mississippi Power & Light Company v. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 5:37 am
The parties engaged some of the most powerful firms and lawyers in the state, and multiple amicus briefs were filed. [read post]
19 Dec 2023, 8:57 am by CMS
  The Court of Appeal held unanimously that the relevant provisions of the legislation do not confer any power on the Receiver to decide whether salvage is due, or how much salvage is due, and do not require the Receiver to continue to detain a wreck if a State successfully invokes state immunity in response to a claim for salvage. [read post]
23 Mar 2020, 2:30 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
AM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 4-5 December 2019. [read post]
10 Jan 2019, 12:32 pm
  No rational investor would equate the power to appoint [the Company’s] directors with the power to sack an independent Conflicts Committee, at will, and replace it with loyalists, the first time [the Company’s] Conflicts Committee rejected” a proposal. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 7:10 am
  The decision came in the case of Medellin v. [read post]
27 Jan 2012, 8:45 am by David Wagner
Greenhouse Gas Litigation (Jennifer Smokelin, Pittsburgh) Regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) litigation, there are two main areas to watch in 2012: (i) the United States Supreme Court (and the Ninth Circuit) in the aftermath of American Electric Power v. [read post]
7 Jul 2014, 10:42 am by Old Fox
Why do Christian conservatives say it’s important for schoolchildren to bow before a symbol of secular power? [read post]
2 Jan 2009, 6:04 pm
  Arguably, it also cannot be squared with the ruling last April of a sharply divided (5-4) Supreme Court in Massachusetts v. [read post]
18 Nov 2023, 4:28 am by Mark Graber
  They made no distinction between an officer, which included the president, an officer of the United States, and an officer under the United States. [read post]
1 May 2007, 11:58 am
The filings were in response to an application (Zalita v. [read post]