Search for: "Van Order v. State"
Results 1161 - 1180
of 1,433
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
The Great Migration had produced important swing blocs of black voters in northern and border states who in 1930 shocked the nation with their demand that a nominee to the Supreme Court care about racial justice. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 1:14 pm
Concurrence: One of these days we should resolve what, if anything, is left of Humphrey's Executor v. [read post]
5 Feb 2023, 1:20 am
The ECtHR Grand Chamber judgment in Fedotova v Russia on the legal recognition of same-sex couples. [read post]
27 Dec 2022, 6:30 am
” (This latter point becomes the focus of my later essay on A Mantra in Search of Meaning, also published as part of a symposium, this one at the University of North Carolina Law School celebrating the 40th anniversary of Baker v. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 4:04 pm
Brendan Van Alsenoy and Marieke Koekkoek, SSRN. [read post]
18 Oct 2020, 4:59 pm
On 13 October 2020 there was a statement in open court in the case of Warnes v Forge before Warby J. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 11:26 am
Might work better if claims were confined to copyright v. patent w/r/t software? [read post]
29 May 2022, 4:05 pm
Important factors in the decision was the potential risk to health and safety caused by protestors committing the acts set out in the order [34, 40-42]. [read post]
24 May 2024, 1:49 am
He states that the following needs to apply in order to serve a valid section 21 notice:- You are seeking possession after 4 months of the tenancy starting The property is licensed (if applicable) The deposit was put into a recognised scheme within 30 days No improvement notices have been served Any unlawful fees have been repaid A landlord also need to have served in the correct manner and at the correct time:- EPC certificate Current ‘How to Rent Guide’ Current Gas… [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 5:14 am
Hewlett-Packard Co. v Acceleron LLC (Inventive Step) (IP Spotlight) District Court S D California.: Evidence relating to re-examination proceedings excluded from trial: Presidio Components Inc., v. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 8:48 am
Finally, in concluding his analysis of the constitutionality of the relevant chapter of the Act, MacMenamin J referred to Demir v. [read post]
17 Mar 2020, 9:18 am
A similar dispute arose later in the Djibouti v. [read post]
11 May 2022, 8:40 am
§ 1030), particularly as interpreted in Van Buren v. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 4:35 am
Decisions this Week United States Trump v. [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 4:39 am
Menzel v. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 6:23 pm
" United States v. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 1:18 pm
Rickert disagrees that an Article V consensus should be required in order for the Supreme Court to find that something is a form of caste. [read post]
5 Oct 2006, 12:23 am
In its judgement from 10 March 2006, the Trial Chamber stated that both MarijaÄić and Rebić deliberately disclosed information regarding the testimony of Johannes van Kuijk, a Dutch army officer who testified as a protected witness in the case against former Croatian Army general Tihomir BlaÅ¡kić. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 6:02 am
All records on the Device described in Attachment A that reference or relate to violations of Title 18, United States Code, Section 175 . . . and involve DANIEL HARRY MILZMAN, including: a. [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 9:00 pm
Notably, Romer and Romer’s study was completed with U.S. federal income tax data, not state level data. [read post]
