Search for: "Younger v. State"
Results 141 - 160
of 1,680
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Dec 2009, 7:47 am
The case, Ontario v. [read post]
30 Aug 2014, 3:52 am
”” That amused me because it immediately brought to mind United States v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 6:19 pm
In Moss v. [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 2:42 pm
In City of Troy v. [read post]
29 Dec 2008, 9:40 am
V More particularly, there is a sense in which legal proceedings themselves are spectacular. [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 4:24 am
Whether the Eighth Circuit erred in holding, in conflict with decisions of this Court and three other courts of appeals, that the possibility of filing a separate mandamus action was in and of itself “sufficient” to provide an “adequate opportunity” requiring Younger abstention, where plaintiffs had no opportunity to challenge the constitutionality of the preliminary hearing procedure in the course of the state’s abuse and neglect proceedings? [read post]
6 Jul 2022, 11:16 am
In Johnson, et al., v. [read post]
5 Nov 2017, 2:15 pm
[Prinsep v. [read post]
14 Jan 2022, 12:30 pm
[E-mail notice, verified gang members, and Younger abstention.] [read post]
24 Jun 2023, 11:07 am
” Lozano v. [read post]
7 Jul 2014, 2:28 pm
Kenney v. [read post]
16 Jul 2015, 9:12 am
See Broad v. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:00 am
The case, BG v LH, concerns three children. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:00 am
The case, BG v LH, concerns three children. [read post]
4 Jul 2008, 4:03 am
The Court of Appeal disagreed, affirming in an unpublished opinion.Years later, the state Supreme Court decided People v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 6:44 am
Davila v. [read post]
5 Sep 2011, 8:44 pm
A recent New Jersey Supreme Court Case, State v. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 11:04 am
United States (Fiduciary Trust) Caddo Nation of Oklahoma v. [read post]
29 Jan 2010, 7:05 pm
"Sherfick appears to be saying that a constitutional amendment would prevent younger voters from electing legislators committed to repealing the state's statutory DOMA. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 12:39 pm
”’” (Id. at p. 382, quoting Graham, supra, 560 U.S. at p. 69 and Kennedy v. [read post]