Search for: "Waters v. State of Alabama"
Results 101 - 120
of 316
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jun 2018, 4:19 am
It arises from a decades-long dispute between Florida and Georgia over Georgia’s use of water in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin, which begins in northeast Georgia and flows south into the Florida Panhandle, along the two states’ borders with Alabama. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 4:26 am
It arises from a decades-long dispute between Florida and Georgia over Georgia’s use of water in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin, which begins in northeast Georgia and flows south into the Florida Panhandle, along the two states’ borders with Alabama. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 10:10 am
It arises from a decades-long dispute between Florida and Georgia over Georgia’s use of water in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin, which begins in northeast Georgia and flows south into the Florida Panhandle, along the two states’ borders with Alabama. [read post]
20 Jun 2018, 9:01 pm
Alabama. [read post]
20 Jun 2018, 11:30 am
It arises from a decades-long dispute between Florida and Georgia over Georgia’s use of water in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin, which begins in northeast Georgia and flows south into the Florida Panhandle, along the two states’ borders with Alabama. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 4:42 am
The amendment has been construed to bar suits by citizens against their own states, Papasan v. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 4:23 am
The first is United States v. [read post]
9 Feb 2018, 8:35 am
Alabama Coushatta Tribe of Texas (Indian Gaming Regulatory Act – Class II Gaming)United States v. [read post]
8 Feb 2018, 2:02 pm
Alabama Coushatta Tribe of Texas (Indian Gaming Regulatory Act - Class II Gaming)United States v. [read post]
8 Feb 2018, 2:02 pm
Alabama Coushatta Tribe of Texas (Indian Gaming Regulatory Act - Class II Gaming)United States v. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 5:51 am
In Pinnacle Foods Inc. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 5:51 am
In Pinnacle Foods Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2018, 2:26 am
’” A group of 17 states, led by Alabama, also supports the private land owners, who have the property interests in the case. [read post]
9 Jan 2018, 7:41 am
Railway Co. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2018, 11:33 am
A date with the Supreme Court: Florida v. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 11:19 am
Keller on behalf of STATE OF TEXAS (Keller, Scott) (Entered: 11/28/2017)11/28/201711 MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amici Curiae by STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OF ARKANSAS, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF LOUISIANA, STATE OF OKLAHOMA, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Brief of Texas et al., # 2 Text of Proposed… [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 11:19 am
Keller on behalf of STATE OF TEXAS (Keller, Scott) (Entered: 11/28/2017)11/28/201711 MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amici Curiae by STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OF ARKANSAS, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF LOUISIANA, STATE OF OKLAHOMA, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Brief of Texas et al., # 2 Text of Proposed… [read post]
29 Nov 2017, 9:09 am
[12/5/2017 UPDATE: See subsequent blog post on--> Judge Kelly's TRO ruling from the bench in English v Trump et Mulvaney with hotlink to full transcript.]TEXT OF STATE OF TEXAS AMICUS MOTION Motion of the States of Texas, West Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas,Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and South Carolina To File Brief asAmici Curiae in Support of Defendants:The States of Texas, West Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia,Louisiana,… [read post]
29 Nov 2017, 9:09 am
(lctjk1) (Entered: 11/29/2017)TEXT OF STATE OF TEXAS AMICUS MOTION Motion of the States of Texas, West Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas,Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and South Carolina To File Brief asAmici Curiae in Support of Defendants:The States of Texas, West Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia,Louisiana, Oklahoma, and South Carolina move for leave to file the attachedamici curiae brief in support of defendants.1. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 11:11 am
Alabama, 16-9304 Issue: Whether, when the Alabama Supreme Court failed to apply the reasoning and analysis mandated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Foster v. [read post]
