Search for: "Bills v. State"
Results 1741 - 1760
of 21,823
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2014, 4:03 am
[iv]See Education Law §390.3[v] When it was established in 1964 then professional employees could continue in their respective State retirement system or elect to participate in ORP. [read post]
18 Feb 2022, 7:52 pm
Enter Stratton Oakmont v. [read post]
11 Aug 2007, 3:22 am
[www.angel-diaz.us][www.angel-diaz.us] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA BILL McCOLLUM, etc., et al., Petitioners, v. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 9:39 pm
United States.As Bill noted earlier, I did a teleforum for the Federalist Society on the case. [read post]
18 May 2012, 7:02 am
State v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 8:59 am
Critics of the bill may find some solace in a recent ruling in Crossen v. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 6:23 pm
As we have previously reported here, California Assembly Bill 5 (the bill) is slated to codify the California Supreme Court’s 2018 landmark decision in Dynamex Operations West v. [read post]
19 Feb 2010, 7:28 am
The appellate court, in Goza v. [read post]
10 Mar 2021, 5:38 pm
The bill would outlaw abortion in the state in all cases except to save the life of a pregnant woman in a medical emergency, with no allowance for an abortion under any other circumstances, including for cases of rape or incest. [read post]
26 May 2009, 10:52 pm
SCOTUSBLog is the go-to source on that topic and also on SCOTUS' decision yesterday to overturn Michigan v. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 3:00 pm
AUTHOR: Melina V. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Inst. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 5:59 am
By Ashley PaynterIn Bonner v. [read post]
2 May 2019, 5:42 am
The Bill is in response to the 2018 ruling of the Supreme Court of Texas in ConocoPhillips Company et al v. [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 1:38 pm
See United States v. [read post]
2 May 2011, 6:07 pm
Supreme Court decision, Snyder v. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 7:21 pm
Lopez and United States v. [read post]
28 Feb 2008, 6:01 pm
In Harrington v. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 5:16 am
State v. [read post]
27 Nov 2012, 2:34 am
In other words, it seems to grate against the concept of reciprocity and harmonisation which is a stated objective of the Bill.Fourthly, the Bill proposes that ministerial consent first be obtained before an application for gTLD can be made. [read post]
