Search for: "Sullivan Co. v. Wells" Results 141 - 160 of 377
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2017, 3:01 pm
But these societal relations can have regulatory effect; and the state may well seek to legalize some to all of those societal relations. [read post]
9 Apr 2017, 8:35 am
Section V then posits an alternative analysis, normatively autonomous (though not entirely free) of the orbit of the state, a vision possible only when the ideological presumptions of the state are suspended. [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 3:32 am by Peter Mahler
§ 1332 which specifically deems a “corporation” to be a citizen of its state of incorporation as well as the state in which it has its principal place of business. [read post]
8 Nov 2016, 4:09 am by Edith Roberts
City of Miami and Wells Fargo & Co. v. [read post]
17 Oct 2016, 4:36 am by Edith Roberts
 Clinton should have more respect for the independence and dignity of the judiciary as a co-equal but non-political branch of government. [read post]
8 Jun 2016, 6:15 am by Marty Lederman
DOJ then convened a hearing before a designated “hearing officer,” Lawrence Grauman, a well-respected former Kentucky state judge. [read post]
5 May 2016, 8:28 am by Benjamin D. Tievsky
., New York’s Court of Appeals did not overrule its 2002 decision in Consolidated Edison Co. of New York v. [read post]
27 Mar 2016, 2:54 pm
Section V then posits an alternative analysis, normatively autonomous (though not entirely free) of the orbit of the state, a vision possible only when the ideological presumptions of the state are suspended. [read post]
27 Feb 2016, 6:55 am by Lee E. Berlik
As the United States Supreme Court recognized in New York Times Co. v. [read post]
24 Feb 2016, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
Accordingly, said the court, this case was governed by the rule of New York Times Co. v Sullivan, 376 US 254, in which the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as embodying "the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. [read post]