Search for: "Kim v. State" Results 81 - 100 of 1,442
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jul 2023, 1:47 pm by John Ellis and Kayla Malone
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court decided an important state law issue raised by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. [read post]
Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signed a heartbeat-based abortion ban into law Friday after the bill passed in a marathon special session of the Iowa legislature. [read post]
The bill is one of many state legislative initiatives aimed at curtailing reproductive rights in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision of Dobbs v. [read post]
22 Jun 2023, 11:26 am by Blair & Kim, PLLC
  The appeals court pointed out it had previously rejected a similar res judicata in Muma v. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 2:00 am by INFORRM
An Acoba spokesperson explained “the Ministerial Code states that ministers must ensure that no new appointments are announced, or taken up, before the committee has been able to provide its advice. [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
United States, 445 U.S. 222, 227 n.8 (1980) (quoting Judge Learned Hand’s statement in Gratz v. [read post]
29 May 2023, 9:03 am by INFORRM
The ICO released a statement in response, stating that it does not share the views of the report. [read post]
26 May 2023, 12:42 pm by Joel R. Brandes
 [France][Habitual residence] [Wrongful removal][Petition granted]      In Castang v Jeong-Eun Kim, 2023 WL 1927027 (N.D. [read post]
8 May 2023, 12:22 am by INFORRM
Kim Sengupta said he thought the Russian government is otherwise unlikely to release Gershkovich, who was arrested on a reporting trip in March under charges of espionage. [read post]
30 Apr 2023, 7:46 pm by Blair & Kim, PLLC
” Whether you are seeking or opposing a protection order, the skilled Washington civil protection order attorneys at Blair & Kim, PLLC, have the experience to help. [read post]
30 Apr 2023, 2:06 pm
(See Kim, supra, 9 Cal.5th at pp. 83-85; see also Johnson, supra, 66 Cal.App.5th at p. 930; Rocha v. [read post]