Search for: "Little v State"
Results 9781 - 9800
of 26,841
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Dec 2021, 5:30 am
"An employee's probationary appointment may be terminated without a hearing for any reason or no reason at all, so long as the termination was not in bad faith or for an improper or impermissible reason" (Matter of Messenger v State of New York Dept. of Corr. [read post]
6 Dec 2021, 5:30 am
"An employee's probationary appointment may be terminated without a hearing for any reason or no reason at all, so long as the termination was not in bad faith or for an improper or impermissible reason" (Matter of Messenger v State of New York Dept. of Corr. [read post]
27 Jan 2008, 2:04 pm
United States v. [read post]
8 Feb 2023, 5:39 am
On 7 February 2023, President Joe Biden gave his 2023 State of the Union Address. [read post]
19 May 2014, 9:47 am
State v. [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 2:04 pm
Flowers v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 4:53 am
That lawfare got underway this week when TikTok filed a substantial lawsuit (by the pound) to stop the sale and protect access to the US market, just a little while longer. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 3:25 pm
Ed. 2d 49 (2000), and the NJ Supreme Court in Moriarty v. [read post]
28 Nov 2012, 3:43 am
The UT had little choice but to embark on a consideration of the purposes of Rent Repayment Orders. [read post]
28 Nov 2012, 3:43 am
The UT had little choice but to embark on a consideration of the purposes of Rent Repayment Orders. [read post]
27 Oct 2008, 3:17 pm
Berger v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 7:37 am
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, and joined by Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, found that the ACA phrase “an Exchange established by the state” did not expressly limit tax credits to state Exchanges, as alleged by the petitioners, but was properly viewed as ambiguous and that several other provisions in the ACA would make little sense if tax credits were not available to federal Exchange enrollees (King v.… [read post]
27 Mar 2022, 6:51 pm
This has been the case regardless of what formal test applies, the proportionality test outside the United States, which expressly calls for judges to weigh the relative costs and benefits of a restriction, or the Employment Division v. [read post]
19 Oct 2007, 5:36 pm
Blumenthal v. [read post]
13 Jan 2023, 10:20 am
ShareWednesday’s argument in Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 10:33 am
Peruta v. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 4:47 pm
"] In Smith v. [read post]
19 Mar 2008, 10:51 am
Now, let's change our facts a little. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 2:47 pm
Anything less brings us back to where we were before Roe v. [read post]
24 Aug 2012, 4:34 pm
Chief Justice Barbara Madsen is a little more optimistic than I, stating, “We understand the delicate balance in providing a constitutional right to an attorney and the monetary impact on local governments. [read post]
