Search for: "STATE v. SCOTT" Results 1401 - 1420 of 6,286
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2019, 6:32 am by MBettman
” Justice Stewart, to counsel for the City and Scott On June 12, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in David Ayers v. [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 4:00 am by Thomas Merrill
Township of Scott and Justice Stephen Breyer’s in Franchise Tax Board of California v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 8:27 pm by Ilya Somin
Township of Scott, which I analyzed in this post), and another important precedent has been significantly eroded in the Kisor case. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 6:17 pm by justia.admin
Township of Scott, which held that landowners are entitled to pursue just compensation in federal court when local or state law has effected a taking of private property. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 3:58 am by Edith Roberts
” At the National Conference of State Legislators Blog, Lisa Soronen looks at Georgia v. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Lincoln, after all, politicized Dred Scott not to move Taney Court justices but to help authorize “a new birth of freedom. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 3:58 am by Edith Roberts
The justices held 5-4 in United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2019, 12:29 pm by DONALD SCARINCI
“Indeed, blind obedience to stare decisis would leave this Court still abiding grotesque errors like Dred Scott v. [read post]
24 Jun 2019, 3:55 am by Edith Roberts
Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, the justices, by a 5-4 vote, overruled a 34-year-old precedent that required property owners to follow state compensation procedures before bringing federal takings claim under the Constitution. [read post]
22 Jun 2019, 8:55 am by Walter Olson
Township of Scott, on whether owners whose property is taken must first exhaust state remedies before seeking relief in federal court, is a big win for property owners. [read post]
22 Jun 2019, 3:15 am by Wally Zimolong
For nearly 36 years, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. [read post]