Search for: "State v. So "
Results 1001 - 1020
of 117,966
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Oct 2016, 8:35 am
The Supreme Court has held that the Secretary of State is free to order service of documents on a person within the jurisdiction and that doing so is an administrative process and not one that attaches to it obligations on the Secretary of State to investigate the nature of the proceedings behind the request. [read post]
6 Jan 2018, 7:09 am
”) State v. [read post]
20 Mar 2010, 11:12 am
State, 868 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 2003); Guzman v. [read post]
17 Mar 2007, 1:10 pm
The KSC dismissed as improvidently granted a state's petition for review preserving Mark Schoenhofer's win in State v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 4:36 am
State v. [read post]
27 Sep 2023, 7:19 am
Unique lawsuits like Alienation of Affection and Criminal Conversation are still a part of the state’s legal fabric, as the Hull v. [read post]
24 Aug 2012, 4:03 pm
In State v. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 12:35 pm
We have not before treated a lawsuit against an individual employee as one against a state instrumentality, and Clarke offers no persuasive reason to do so now. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 7:46 am
In State v. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 7:46 am
In State v. [read post]
24 Apr 2007, 8:54 pm
Yesterday's oral argument in Wilson, a short one regarding the meaning of a CA's action, reminded me of why arguments are so much fun. [read post]
11 Jul 2007, 10:44 am
When you're litigating against the United States, there are lots and lots of ways to lose. [read post]
25 Jun 2023, 3:09 pm
So Justice Kavanaugh latched onto Linda S. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2020, 8:52 am
Whether, under SEC v. [read post]
24 Jan 2023, 6:33 am
That argument stems from a New York State Court of Appeals ruling, Hoffman v. [read post]
14 Jan 2022, 9:00 pm
District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected the states’ claims, ruling that the negative economic effects of the $10,000 cap were not so severe as to impermissibly coerce the states into changing their policies. [read post]
24 Oct 2010, 11:14 am
"Unconstitutional Surveillance & United States v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 8:16 am
" (Paragraph 42)and:"The rule in Hildebrand as we have stated it in paragraph [42] above was and remains good law. [read post]
25 Jul 2015, 5:00 am
This follows a number of landmark cases including Wheaton v Peters 33 US (8 Pet) 591, 668 (1834), Banks & Bros v West Publishing Co 27 F 50 (CCD) Minn, 1886, right up to the case of the State of Georgia v The Harrison Company 548 F Supp 110 (N d Ga 1982). [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 6:30 am
I rely on a foundational case from Pennsylvania, Commonwealth v. [read post]
