Search for: "State v. Light"
Results 921 - 940
of 26,324
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2010, 7:05 pm
In Florida Power & Light Company, et al v. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 8:51 am
Prior to the remedies hearing the USA asked the court if it had the power to order redundancy payments in light of the principles of state immunity, however the court ruled that because the USA had already submitted the appeal and had not pleaded state immunity from the outset, it was unable to consider this submission. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 11:23 am
The state of play now is as follows: trial will begin at 1500 hours with opening statements on the missing movement offense. [read post]
13 Mar 2020, 2:22 pm
The New Jersey Supreme Court faced this question in State v. [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 6:36 am
Under Cheek v. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 10:09 am
In State of South Dakota v. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 11:23 am
“[W]when read in light of the Act’s purpose and numerous provisions, the prohibitions are clearly limited to communications directed to the consumer and do not apply to state judges. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 6:27 am
Initially, the leave was supposed to be for three months, but after the winter, her doctor wrote a note to the school stating that she would not be able to return for the remainder of the school year. [read post]
4 May 2012, 3:00 pm
In Hood v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 9:02 pm
State v. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 4:23 am
U.S. v. [read post]
12 Sep 2010, 1:22 pm
" However the Court concluded that: "allowing the plaintiffs to use municipal funds, labor, and equipment for the nightly menorah lighting, even if the plaintiffs repaid the City for such labor and equipment, as required under the stipulation, would foster the perception of an unconstitutional excessive governmental entanglement with religion (see Walz v Tax Comm'n of City of New York, 397 US 664, 674; Citizens Concerned for Separation of Church & State… [read post]
12 Sep 2010, 1:22 pm
However the Court concluded that: "allowing the plaintiffs to use municipal funds, labor, and equipment for the nightly menorah lighting, even if the plaintiffs repaid the City for such labor and equipment, as required under the stipulation, would foster the perception of an unconstitutional excessive governmental entanglement with religion (see Walz v Tax Comm'n of City of New York, 397 US 664, 674; Citizens Concerned for Separation of Church & State v City &… [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 5:51 am
In Moreno v. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 2:53 am
State v. [read post]
21 May 2018, 6:00 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 9:35 pm
State v. [read post]
22 Apr 2013, 3:05 pm
This legislation is remarkable in light of all the uproar over the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products v. [read post]
1 Jun 2008, 9:45 pm
State v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 5:04 pm
Quinn and Burwell v. [read post]