Search for: "William C. Miller"
Results 101 - 120
of 429
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jun 2019, 10:35 am
See also Miller v. [read post]
17 May 2019, 9:30 pm
Thomas C. [read post]
5 May 2019, 8:18 am
Judge Bates clerked for Judge Roszel C. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 6:32 am
Zachary C. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 5:55 am
Klemash and Jamie C. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 9:06 pm
The civil action filed by William M. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:50 am
Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) (describing when incitement may be criminalized); Miller v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:50 am
Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) (describing when incitement may be criminalized); Miller v. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 6:16 am
Williams, 2011-Ohio-3374 (The registration requirements of R.C. 2950 are punitive, rather than remedial, measures.) [read post]
27 Feb 2019, 9:01 pm
The justices kept asking Miller about the differences between the Ten Commandments and the cross.Justice Breyer, the concurring justice in the Texas Ten Commandments case, seemed to pick up his reasoning from that case. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:45 pm
Fed.R.Civ.P. 71.1(c)(1). [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:44 pm
Williams,7 Dorrance recognizes that public purposes and public exigencies should be proportionately shared rather than excessively burdening individuals: Every person ought to contribute his proportion for public purposes and public exigencies; but no one can be called upon to surrender or sacrifice his whole property, real and personal, for the good of the community, without receiving a recompense in value. [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 2:34 pm
9:00am-10:45amChair: Daniel Brinks (Texas)Jan-Werner Müeller (Princeton)Vlad Perju (Boston College)Wojciech Sadurski (Sydney)Kim-Lane Scheppele (Princeton) Session II: The Erosion of Constraints on Executive Power11:00am-12:45pmChair: Zachary Elkins (Texas)Asli Bâli (UCLA)Mark Graber (Maryland)Russell Miller (Washington & Lee)Miguel Schor (Drake)Session III: Managing Difference and… [read post]
7 Feb 2019, 9:01 pm
To invoke associational standing, FASORP is also required to show that (a) its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (b) the interests FASORP seeks to protect are germane to the organization’s purpose; and (c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participation of individual members in the lawsuit.These standing requirements pose some significant challenges for FASORP’s case. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 10:41 am
But the new view (dating from a 1985 paper by David Hartman that drew on earlier work, regarding classical double corporate income taxation, by the likes of David Bradford, Alan Auerbach, Mervyn King, and William Andrews) showed that under certain conditions this is false. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 9:05 am
Keith C. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 9:01 pm
Last week an Alabama trial court judge (Michael Graffeo) made national news when (literally just minutes before his judicial term expired and he began retirement) he held that the Alabama Memorial Protection Act (AMPA)—which prohibits public jurisdictions within the state from altering or otherwise disturbing public monuments that have been in existence for at least forty years—violated the Fourteenth Amendment free speech and due process rights of the City of Birmingham, which sought to… [read post]
13 Jan 2019, 3:22 pm
With a nice Miller v. [read post]
29 Nov 2018, 9:00 pm
Imagine that, as between Candidates A and C, Candidate B’s voters prefer Candidate C by a margin of 16 to 14. [read post]
9 Oct 2018, 5:02 am
Is illegality of contingent-fee contract under Texas Gov’t Code § 82.065 arbitrable? [read post]
