Search for: "BATES v. THE STATE"
Results 141 - 160
of 567
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Sep 2021, 11:52 am
Bates and MA v. [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 2:07 pm
Justin Bates then turns to establishing discrimination. [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 11:29 am
Argus Leader) and third (Iancu v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 3:54 am
In the famous 1977 Bates decision, the U.S. [read post]
19 Mar 2009, 5:59 am
State, 2009 Md. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 1:46 pm
United States v. [read post]
7 Mar 2008, 5:19 am
The claims in Bates v. [read post]
1 Mar 2019, 12:14 pm
On Feb. 27, the Supreme Court issued a 7-1 opinion in Jam v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 6:43 pm
Ronwin); and (3) a board controlled by attorneys prohibits attorney advertising and deters attorneys from engaging in price competition (Bates v. [read post]
31 May 2012, 9:47 am
Supreme Court’s 1990 decision in Hughey v. [read post]
9 Apr 2020, 7:51 am
Sandig v. [read post]
26 Jan 2018, 7:14 am
Wesby and Artis v. [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 11:34 am
Most notably, Judge Bates wrote that suits against government officials in their official capacity amounted to suits against the United States and thus implicated the federal government’s sovereign immunity from suit. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 6:16 am
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
27 Jun 2012, 1:43 pm
See Bates v. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 12:20 pm
In United States v. [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 8:40 am
”) Bowman v. [read post]
24 Mar 2023, 6:00 am
The court then explained that an "appointment of an individual from a constitutionally valid expired list violates Article V, §6 of the NY Constitution" citing Matter of City of New York v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 93 NY2d 768.* Nevertheless, in light of the conditional offer of employment given to Plaintiff, and his request for back pay, the Appellate Division denied the Respondents' request that the Appellate Division dismiss… [read post]
24 Mar 2023, 6:00 am
The court then explained that an "appointment of an individual from a constitutionally valid expired list violates Article V, §6 of the NY Constitution" citing Matter of City of New York v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 93 NY2d 768.* Nevertheless, in light of the conditional offer of employment given to Plaintiff, and his request for back pay, the Appellate Division denied the Respondents' request that the Appellate Division dismiss… [read post]
12 May 2020, 3:53 am
All parties concerned will no doubt be awaiting the Supreme Court’s judgment with bated breath. [read post]
