Search for: "O’CONNOR V. STATE"
Results 1801 - 1820
of 1,822
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Aug 2009, 3:22 am
Absent a connection to the employment decision, stray remarks likely do not suffice as evidence, as noted by Justice O’Connor in her concurring opinion in Price Waterhouse v. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 5:21 am
(Ars Technica) New Zealand NZ releases consultation on revised three strikes proposal (Michael Geist) (Ars Technica) (TorrentFreak) Nigeria 2 Face Idibia sheds light on music industry in Nigeria (Afro-IP) Norway Pirate Bay block violates democratic principles, says Norway’s largest ISP Telenor (TorrentFreak) Spain Domain name ‘seguridadsocial.es’ finds its (secure) way home (Class 46) Sweden Pirate… [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 3:39 pm
As it turns out this Connors case below was not heard by the California or US Supreme Court.Essentially the court opinion below upheld the 1959 California Superme Court decision Cosper v. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 9:37 am
Justice O’Connor's opinion held that to shift the burden of persuasion to the employer, the employee must present “direct evidence that an illegitimate criterion was a substantial factor in the [employment] decision. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 1:59 pm
Indeed the opinion quoted Justice O’Connor’s prior observation that “lower court decisions seem now to treat the ability to search a vehicle incident to the arrest of a recent occupant as a police entitlement rather than as an exception”. [read post]
30 Mar 2009, 10:09 am
His verdict in Benedi v. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 1:37 pm
Olson, 495 U.S. 91, 96-100, 110 S.Ct. 1684 (1990); O'Connor v. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 2:30 am
" United States v. [read post]
8 Jan 2009, 5:56 am
Taylor • 206.373.7208 • mtaylor@cozen.com Cozen O’Connor. [read post]
8 Jan 2009, 5:56 am
Taylor • 206.373.7208 • mtaylor@cozen.com Cozen O’Connor. [read post]
1 Jan 2009, 8:18 pm
Justice O'Connor's concurring opinion in Price Waterhouse, however, required an employee to produce "direct evidence" of discrimination where mixed motive is at issue. [read post]
1 Jan 2009, 8:18 pm
Justice O'Connor's concurring opinion in Price Waterhouse, however, required an employee to produce "direct evidence" of discrimination where mixed motive is at issue. [read post]
29 Dec 2008, 9:53 pm
They don’t know very much about irradiation, or how it would benefit them. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 10:01 pm
” California State Bd. of Equalization v. [read post]
7 Mar 2008, 9:17 am
Scalia seemed to be presuming that O’Connor’s successor, Samuel Alito Jr, would vote against such new causes of action.Roberts, too, seemed determined to draw a sharp historical boundary between now and then. [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 4:46 am
Indeed, Justice O'Connor's concurrence in the Price Waterhouse v. [read post]
10 Jan 2007, 7:00 am
” In addition, Ford provided the impetus for a “friend of the court” brief in the Supreme Court filed on behalf of high-ranking retired military leaders that is often credited with helping to convince swing vote Justice O’Connor to allow affirmative action at the University of Michigan Law School. [read post]
21 Jun 2006, 6:48 am
State v. [read post]
14 Jun 2006, 6:53 am
State v. [read post]
7 Jun 2006, 6:38 am
”Resnick, Pfeifer and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent.The conflict case is State v. [read post]
