Search for: "State v. Little"
Results 8861 - 8880
of 23,584
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jan 2012, 4:08 pm
In Busch v. [read post]
22 May 2012, 8:04 am
Schenck v. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 9:17 am
The Commission found potential claims regarding the right to equality and freedom from racial discrimination (Article II) and the right to protection of the law for one's private and family life (Article V). [read post]
6 Mar 2009, 6:43 am
The defendant in United States v. [read post]
3 Aug 2012, 9:51 am
Inc. v. [read post]
11 Aug 2024, 12:25 pm
Perry (same-sex marriage) Joined blue state amicus brief in United States v. [read post]
10 Jan 2025, 4:11 am
The best reason I can come up with is that under the majority opinion in United States v. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 7:59 am
On November 10, 2011, the Sixth Circuit issued its decision in Pilgrim, et al. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2009, 10:21 pm
In EEOC v. [read post]
18 Jul 2006, 3:05 pm
Norton, (KSC, reversing drug convictions based on newly discovered evidence); State v. [read post]
1 Jan 2011, 3:39 am
In Gaines v. [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 6:00 am
In Yeung v. [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 8:37 am
The Court of Appeals reverses and allows the state court conviction to stand.The case is Corby v. [read post]
18 Apr 2023, 8:55 am
Here is the abstract: In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
13 Sep 2014, 11:20 am
Beshada v. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 4:00 am
United States, a Massachusetts case, the justices have been asked to determine whether they meant what they wrote about juries and drug sentences in Alleyne v. [read post]
15 May 2013, 8:41 am
Cir. 1991), quoting Newkirk v. [read post]
4 Dec 2009, 12:56 am
Anyone who can remember the events leading up to the inclusion of an employee invention code in the Patents Act 1977, and who can recall the reasons why it took the form it did, will know that the legislature had little or no idea what it was doing and may have passed the whole of sections 39 to 42 in a zombie-like legal vegitative state. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 5:29 pm
Justice Stevens depicted the petitioners' view of immunity as "a strange proposition" - and Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal, arguing for the United States and the petitioners, agreed it "seems a little odd. [read post]
