Search for: "MATTER OF DAVIS v. Brown"
Results 141 - 160
of 269
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 May 2010, 6:36 am
Wagner was willing to remove an antidiscrimination provision from the Wagner Act to placate the AFL, which wanted to use its new power to exclude blacks, FDR was unwilling to support anti-lynching legislation, and so on (more examples can be found in my Only One Place of Redress book)—and 1964, when a significant majority of the white public supported Brown v. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 4:45 am
In Sessions v. [read post]
23 Sep 2018, 9:50 am
Henry v. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 4:46 pm
Stevens (2010) and in Brown v. [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 2:11 pm
OPINION ADA BROWN, Justice. [read post]
17 Oct 2015, 2:03 pm
Metaphysics: Toney v. [read post]
4 Feb 2023, 6:30 am
Virginia, Skinner v. [read post]
10 Nov 2017, 4:25 am
Matter of Garraway v Fischer, 106 AD3d 1301, 1301 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 864 [2013]; Eklund v Pinkey, 27 AD3d 878, 879 [2006]). [read post]
7 May 2020, 6:30 am
As a matter of history, doubtful. [read post]
10 Dec 2011, 6:44 pm
Brown, 262 S.W.3d 63, 70 (Tex. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 8:58 am
Douglas, prepared the famous case, Brown v. [read post]
16 Aug 2009, 9:51 pm
A judgment as a matter of law may not be granted in the Fifth Circuit unless "there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find as the jury did" (Hiltgen v Sumrall 1995). [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 6:53 am
Koshenina v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 3:30 am
However, at the time Davis was decided, the Court had earlier determined in Griggs v. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 6:12 am
My own list is Bakke (for rejecting all the rationales for affirmative action that really matter), Buckley v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 8:47 am
The insightful concluding sentence of Michael Dorf’s post provides an excellent starting point: “The only real question in this case is the one that Charles Black saw at issue in Brown v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 5:17 am
In NFL v. [read post]
4 Dec 2016, 4:08 pm
Last week in the Courts On 29 and 30 November and 1 December 2016 the Court of Appeal (Macfarlane, Davis and Sharp LJJ) heard the important “serious harm” appeal in the case of Lachaux v Independent Print. [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 1:12 am
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Brown v. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 2:40 pm
"[18] The Goslin court not only reversed the trial court, but it instructed the trial court to allow the petitioner to amend her petition since the record was absent of any representation regarding her residence at the time of filing.[19] Also on point is federal case law from within our State.[20] In Davis v Davis, 638 F Supp 862 (ND Ill 1986), the petitioner had not been a resident of Illinois for 90 days preceding the filing of her petition. [read post]
