Search for: "Pain v. Municipal Court"
Results 141 - 160
of 226
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Nov 2013, 7:04 pm
§§ 2510 et seq., as amended by the PATRIOT Act, authorizes a cause of action against municipalities. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 8:00 am
Instead, they want the Court to make the following unprecedented rulings: apply a version of the coercion test that has never been applied by any court to federal, state, or municipal legislative prayer, even by courts that have held legislative prayer policies unconstitutional; extend the child-focused approach of Lee v. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 4:30 am
Municipal Court, relied upon by the detainees, did not create a special category of habeas jurisdiction for any challenge involving a severe restraint on individual liberty. [read post]
13 Jul 2013, 3:02 am
People v. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 1:25 pm
In Koontz v. [read post]
24 Apr 2013, 7:05 am
In McWeeney v. [read post]
21 Oct 2012, 7:22 pm
Depos v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 7:42 am
The Roscoe v Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM) case was released by the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia on December 29, 2011. [read post]
14 Jul 2012, 3:00 am
However, the Court takes pains to note that it is not, as argued by petitioner, only or primarily the functional relationship between respondents and the State actors, including the Legislature, the State-created Commission on hospital closings, and the State Department of Health, that is dispositive here. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 5:30 am
The court explains in Constant v. [read post]
22 Jun 2012, 5:03 am
The appellate court disagreed and last week issued a decision in Schaefer v. [read post]
25 May 2012, 7:10 am
The case, “McCall v. [read post]
25 May 2012, 7:10 am
The case, “McCall v. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 8:05 am
In general, courts recognize the ability [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 1:09 am
The Supreme Court was at pains to reject Rix LJ's suggestion. [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 12:47 pm
One of the earliest examples — demonstrating that even the courts would only grudgingly support the will of the voters — came in the case of People v. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 7:52 am
And the use, as evidence in a criminal proceeding, of facts ascertained by such intrusion must be deemed a violation of the Fifth.I'm always saddened by the fact that Brandeis wrote that ringing paragraph not for the Court in Olmstead v. [read post]
28 Jan 2012, 11:34 am
In Vasquez v. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 3:39 am
Still, last week the court was confronted with pretty much the same situation in State v. [read post]
