Search for: "State v. District Court (Brown)" Results 1181 - 1200 of 3,172
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Mar 2024, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
United States itself, the district court acted conventionally to block the extreme Texas law. [read post]
29 May 2025, 12:27 pm
But the district court denied GEO at summary judgment, holding that the challenged policies were not required by the ICE contract. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
” Further, such an individual may be found to be disqualified for unemployment insurance benefits.Further, the decision in Blair suggests that a court could deem a retirement to be the equivalent of a resignation for the purposes of 4 NYCRR 5.3(b).* Blair v Horn, 2008 NY Slip Op 32581(U)[Not selected for publication in the Official Reports], is posted on the Internet at: http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20NYCO%2020080929167/IN%20THE%20MATTER%20OF%20BLAIR%20v.%20HORN** For… [read post]
3 Dec 2012, 3:42 am by Russ Bensing
In the courts of appeals… In State v. [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 9:07 pm by Lyle Denniston
Brown – a 2011 ruling that appeared to sharply curtail the reach of U.S. courts (in that case, a state court) to decide cases involving a foreign company lacking “continuous and systematic” contacts with the place where the case would be tried. [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 12:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
The Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States (Artist: Gardener Cox) The Oyez site reports that Congressional leaders, especially those from the South, were worried about the potential of a liberal justice being appointed to the Court following the landmark decision in Brown v. [read post]
14 May 2020, 12:09 pm by Phil Dixon
The district court did not therefore err in denying the motion to suppress. [read post]
2 Dec 2009, 12:44 pm
Justice Breyer set the tone for oral arguments on Monday’s argument in Graham County Soil & Water Conservation District v. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 5:00 am by Beck, et al.
  It's not a state law claim - the Supreme Court has never applied a "fraud on the market" presumption to state law even in securities cases.The presumption arose because the Supreme Court bought a questionable proposition – that securities markets are “efficient” and "developed. [read post]