Search for: "Hennings v. Hennings" Results 1301 - 1320 of 2,023
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Aug 2012, 10:00 am by Michael Seay
It is true that “[W]hen a statute is reasonably susceptible of two interpretations, by one of which it is unconstitutional and by the other valid, the court prefers the meaning that preserves to the meaning that destroys” (Panama Refining Co. v. [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 3:30 am
” Noting that the applicant did not allege that the waiver was the result of coercion or duress and its terms were “clear and unambiguous,” the court explained that "[W]hen a waiver is freely and knowingly made and not the product of coercion or duress, a party can waive his rights to seek review of an administrative proceeding and such determination is binding. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 2:34 am by SHG
" News like this can't help but raise thoughts of the 1976 decision, Tarasoff v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 9:02 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Plaintiff loses the case under circumstances are all-too-common.The case is Porter v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 5:45 am
Citing Garcetti v Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, the Circuit Court explained that "[W]hen public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline. [read post]