Search for: "MATTER OF INQUIRY INTO J J S"
Results 81 - 100
of 1,755
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jul 2023, 4:47 pm
Gorsuch J largely considered statutory matters in his concurrence; but, when he turned to constitutional considerations, he noted that the Court’s opinion requires that “strict scrutiny’s demanding standards” have to be met (slip op, at 22). [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 12:48 am
The matter is part heard. [read post]
18 Dec 2011, 4:11 pm
Secondly, there was Eady J’s judgment in the case of CTB v News Group Newspapers (No.4) [2011] EWHC 3099 (QB) was made public. [read post]
1 Sep 2021, 11:29 am
Matthew J. [read post]
25 Aug 2022, 4:54 pm
For one thing, Bruen confirmed, rather than created, the historical inquiry informing the Second Amendment's guarantee. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 11:15 am
But the United States Supreme Court granted Dow’s petition for certiorari on June 28, 2011, ordered that the judgment be vacated and remanded the matter for further consideration in light of J. [read post]
17 Mar 2009, 2:56 pm
Ronald J. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 3:49 pm
Taglieri, Docket No. 18-935, J. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 1:50 am
Bitek’s concession means that it cannot have the relief it sought in the application but in seeking to argue that it is entitled to have the restricted relief it is thereby narrowing the scope of the inquiry. [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 1:24 pm
Irving J. [read post]
21 Jan 2019, 6:19 am
Is Said to Be Considering Large Facebook Fines- Garry J. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 9:03 am
CAAF agreed that the NMCCA erred and reversed, however in a unanimous decision (Stucky, J. concurring) CAAF rejected the government’s argument that an accused must establish a prima facie defense, either to create a possible defense (obligating the trial military judge to conduct an inquiry) or to create a substantial conflict with the plea (for relief at appeal). [read post]
15 Jun 2015, 11:30 am
Here the Court of Appeals, citing Matter of Felix v New York City Dept. of Citywide Admin. [read post]
15 Jun 2015, 11:30 am
In Lanterman, 62 AD3d 1118, affirmed 14 NY3d 275, [Ciparick, J., dissenting] the decision explains that an employee terminated after losing the license required to perform the duties of the position was not entitled to a pre-termination disciplinary hearing because “whether a teacher has the statutorily required qualifications for the position is not a disciplinary matter subject to that provision. [read post]
11 Oct 2011, 7:18 am
’s long inquiry brushed aside important clues. [read post]
18 Feb 2018, 3:40 pm
And so the matter came to hearing. [read post]
6 May 2021, 4:26 pm
Again, Warby LJ found that Saini J’s conclusions were not “wrong, perverse or otherwise unreasonable” [29]. [read post]
31 Aug 2010, 5:32 am
May 25, 2010, Amesbury, J.), in which the Court granted the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, thereby dismissing the Plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages in a motor vehicle accident case based upon the Defendant driver having been found guilty of violating the Motor Vehicle Code in permitting his vehicle to cross the center line of the roadway and impact the Plaintiff’s vehicle.In this matter, the Plaintiff had alleged in the Complaint… [read post]
24 Nov 2020, 5:00 am
That court also ruled that, when the child is under the age of 14, a judicial inquiry into the child’s mental capacity was mandatory. [read post]
1 Feb 2021, 9:05 pm
”The post When Courts Play God, Whose Religion Matters? [read post]
