Search for: "Grant V. Barrett"
Results 101 - 120
of 778
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Nov 2023, 2:32 pm
From Thursday's order in Griffin v. [read post]
23 Feb 2021, 10:58 am
Degraffenreid (formerly Boockvar) and Corman v. [read post]
30 Mar 2023, 10:26 pm
At 9:30 a.m., the Court's order list reflected the grant in Masterpiece Cakeshop and the GVR in Pavan v. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 1:46 pm
” Judge Barrett noted in the opinion that, “[t]o the extent that the State of Ohio is making a deliberate effort to overturn Roe v. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 10:49 am
Photo by Steve Barrett On March 18, 2013, a Petition for Writ of Certiorari was granted in the case of United States v. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 9:30 am
In Zelasko-Barrett v. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 10:12 pm
The Supreme Court granted an injunction in South Bay II. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 10:35 pm
[Merrill v. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 8:29 pm
Here, Barrett was referring to Garland v. [read post]
20 Nov 2006, 11:21 am
The full opinion in Barrett v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:22 pm
Bissoon-Dath et al v. [read post]
16 Feb 2008, 9:07 am
Anderson v. [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 11:16 pm
Barrett v LB Southwark [2008] EWHC 1568 (Comm) was an appeal of a dismissed application for permission to make a s.204 appeal out of time on an intentional homelessness decision upheld at s.202 review. [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 4:16 am
Subscript offers a graphic explainer for Currier v. [read post]
19 Aug 2012, 9:19 pm
(Remember Bush v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 2:44 pm
Barrett wrote: When this Court is asked to grant extraordinary relief, it considers, among other things, whether the applicant "'is likely to succeed on the merits.'" Nken v. [read post]
21 Apr 2023, 7:12 pm
Barr v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 12:47 pm
(BARRETT, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment). [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 3:44 pm
Grants for the 2022-23 term The highest-profile petition granted on Thursday was Moore v. [read post]
12 Jul 2017, 4:15 pm
The basis of the order requiring Facebook to identify TVO was the decision of the House of Lords in Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133, [1973] UKHL 6 (26 June 1973); but it “is a power which for good reasons must be sparingly used” (Megaleasing v Barrett (No 2) [1993] ILRM 497, 503 (Finlay CJ). [read post]
