Search for: "Reese v. State"
Results 161 - 180
of 257
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 May 2012, 4:25 am
The NLRB lacked a quorum of board members when it published its rule amending its representation election procedures on December 16, 2011, and the challenged rule is therefore invalid, the District of Columbia federal district court held, in a perhaps tepid — and temporary — victory for opponents of what has been dubbed the board’s “quickie” or “ambush” election rule (Chamber of Commerce of the United States v NLRB, May 14, 2012, Boasberg,… [read post]
10 May 2012, 9:06 pm
In Reese v. [read post]
8 May 2012, 8:43 am
Then Rosetta Stone v. [read post]
7 May 2012, 4:20 pm
(Eugene Volokh) From United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 4:54 am
A federal district court in South Carolina has invalidated the NLRB's rule requiring employers to post notice in the workplace informing employees of their NLRA rights (Chamber of Commerce of the United States v NLRB, April 13, 2012, Norton, D). [read post]
2 Mar 2012, 6:52 am
Reese (?) [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 9:20 am
Lambert along with another man, Bruce Reese, as being in cahoots with him in robbing the bar. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 9:18 am
The responsibility of the state to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense was articulated in the 1963 Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 1:15 pm
Phelan, 9 F.3d 882, 887 (10th Cir. 1993) (“[a]s a federal court, we are generally reticent to expand state law without clear guidance from its highest court”); Aclys International v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 5:51 am
State v. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 10:22 am
Reese and its progeny, if the claim was never fairly presented at the initial state trial court level.Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (5th Cir.)Petition for certiorari Sponsored by Bloomberg Law [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 4:48 pm
Reese and its progeny, if the claim was never fairly presented at the initial state trial court level.Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (5th Cir.)Petition for certiorari In association with Bloomberg Law [read post]
16 Sep 2011, 11:17 am
United States, United States v. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 1:09 pm
Reese, 684 S.E.2d at 283-85 (automobile); Yarbrough v. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:24 am
The Court of Appeals also noted that the United States Supreme Court stated a “basic teaching of representative government … that elected officials represent all of those who elect them, and not merely those who are their neighbors," citing Dusch (387 US 112, Dallas County, Alabama v Reese (421 US 477) and Fortson v Dorsey, 379 US 433. [read post]
30 Jun 2011, 12:51 pm
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 12:48 pm
In lieu of granting leave to appeal in Beebe v Hartman, No. 142315, the Michigan Supreme Court vacated Part III B of the Court of Appeals’ opinion, for the reasons stated in the Court of Appeals’ concurring opinion. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 7:48 pm
Occupants transported were treated for minor injuries.This crash is still under investigation by Corporal Barnes with assistance from Corporal V. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 3:01 pm
Reese, 627 F.3d 792, 801–02 (10th Cir.2010) (applying intermediate scrutiny to review of § 922(g)(8)); United States v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
Michael Reese Hospital & Medical Center, 513 N.E.2d 387, 393 (Ill. 1987). [read post]
