Search for: "SEVERS v. STATE" Results 161 - 180 of 54,631
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2024, 1:58 pm by Eugene Volokh
Doe alleges that he was the winner of the Maine State Lottery,  that Ms. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm by Evan Brown
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm by Evan Brown
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
Starbucks (10(j) Relief Standard):  On April 23, 2024, oral argument before the United States Supreme Court took place in Starbucks Corp. v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:43 am by centerforartlaw
Source: USPTO  Rothschild moved to dismiss the complaint under the Second Circuit’s Rogers v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
In 1975, the Alaska Supreme Court decided that the state’s marijuana ban violated the state constitution’s right to privacy, following several other state courts that had reached the same conclusion under their own constitutions. [read post]