Search for: "Wilson v. Washington County" Results 81 - 100 of 145
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Aug 2013, 8:13 am by Ed. Microjuris.com Puerto Rico
por Silvia Álvarez Curbelo Ph.D. publicado en la Academia Puertorriqueña de Jurisprudencia y Legislación “Creemos que la Cámara de Delegados, compuesta por los únicos genuinos representantes del pueblo de Puerto Rico, debe reunirse a lo menos una vez cada año, para vigilar los intereses de su pueblo, concurrir a la formación de su propuesto, proveer a las necesidades públicas y elevar al Congreso la perseverante demanda del derecho… [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 5:59 pm by Daniel Joshua Salinas
Plaintiff Integrated Practice Solutions, Inc. is a Washington corporation with its principal place of business in San Diego County, California. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
The other day, I was blogging about tags, and somebody asked what are all the tags. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 6:18 am by Cormac Early
Finally, this blog’s online symposium on Shelby County v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 5:49 pm
In recent weeks, Washington, D.C., has adopted an ordinan [read post]
21 May 2012, 4:54 am by INFORRM
HoldtheFrontPage reports on the judgment at Torquay and Newton Abbot County Court here. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 2:36 pm by Cynthia L. Hackerott
Both Connerly and ACRI were permitted by the district court to intervene in the present case and were represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative/libertarian public interest litigation firm that has successfully represented proponents of Section 31 in other cases, including Coral Constr, Inc v City & County of San Francisco (CalSCt (2010); 93 EPD ¶43,961) and Hi-Voltage Wire Works, Inc v City of San Jose (CalSCt (2000); 76 EPD ¶46,134). [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 1:00 pm by Benjamin Wittes
Earlier today, I had the pleasure of visiting Professor Jack Goldsmith’s “Foreign Relations Law” class, which is studying Hamdan v. [read post]
31 Dec 2010, 2:00 am by John Day
Walgreen Hastings Co., 126 P.2d 774 (N.M. 1998); but see Wilson v. [read post]