Search for: "State v. Light" Results 9901 - 9920 of 28,146
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Apr 2017, 6:07 am by Ed. Microjuris.com Puerto Rico
The resolution of these issues is impossible to predict today in light of the unprecedented nature of Title III, the departures that PROMESA makes from the statutory text and structure of Chapter 9, and the unique history and legal framework of the Commonwealth’s debt obligations. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 5:25 am by Eugene Volokh
An interesting court decision in a university sexual misconduct case, decided last week by the New York intermediate appellate court (though quite possibly eventually headed to the New York high court), Matter of Haug v. [read post]
14 Apr 2017, 4:02 am by Edith Roberts
” At the Special Education Law Blog, Jim Gehrl weighs in on Endrew F. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 9:43 am by Randy Barnett
In the wake of Marshall’s capacious 1819 opinion in McCulloch v. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 8:12 am by Ronald Collins
* * * In 2002, after my wife and I had sufficiently recovered from Bush v. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 7:09 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Of summary judgment:The court must view all facts and draw reasonable inferencesin the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.Scott v. [read post]
12 Apr 2017, 8:00 am by Orin Kerr
In light of the uncertainty, I thought I would point out the latest decision on the Fourth Amendment implications of “no trespassing” signs: State v. [read post]
12 Apr 2017, 3:53 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: At RealClear Education, John McLaughlin lauds the recent decision in Endrew F. v. [read post]
            Department of State (DOS): DOS Acquisition Regulation (DOSAR) § 652.239-71—This clause notes that contractor failure to comply could result in contract termination. 48 CFR 652.239-71(m). [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 10:44 am by Caroline Gentry
Writing for the majority, Chief Judge Diane Wood acknowledged that courts had long answered this question in the negative but stated that the Seventh Circuit was “tak[ing] a fresh look at our position in light of developments at the Supreme Court extending over two decades. [read post]