Search for: "Powers v. State"
Results 1881 - 1900
of 37,174
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 May 2014, 7:47 am
United States and BG Group v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 7:55 am
Juliana v. [read post]
9 Aug 2018, 10:42 am
AmeriCulture Inc. v. [read post]
12 Aug 2007, 7:14 am
State v. [read post]
21 Apr 2023, 7:12 pm
Barr v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 12:49 pm
Separation of powers and all.Oh well. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
STATE V. [read post]
26 May 2009, 12:41 pm
Ct. 586, 594 (2007); United States v. [read post]
8 Feb 2007, 2:30 pm
Eventually Butz writes the State Bar and gets his money back, but meanwhile he's now in "second petition" land, which is neigh impossible. [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 12:01 am
Nixon v. [read post]
29 Jun 2016, 2:27 am
The judgment R (Bancoult No 2) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2008] UKHL 61 was challenged on the grounds that documents disclosed by the FCO in subsequent and separate litigation cast doubt on the reliability of part of a 2002 feasibility study into the resettlement of the former inhabitants of the Chagos Islands. [read post]
23 Oct 2023, 4:44 am
” Emmons v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am
Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
16 Oct 2019, 6:59 am
The Supreme Court has decided exactly one case involving the privilege, and even that decision—in the Watergate tapes case, United States v. [read post]
28 Sep 2010, 5:03 am
United States v. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 10:24 am
In McDonald v. [read post]
3 Aug 2012, 3:52 pm
In Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 2:30 pm
Comstock (No. 08-1224) United States Supreme Court Decision: May 17, 2010 In United States v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 6:46 am
Rejecting the Government’s hypothesis that “detained” is used only to define the state of affairs which must exist at the time when the power is first exercised, the court said that the system of bail would fall into substantial difficulties in operation unless there is a continuing power to detain. [read post]
20 Apr 2009, 3:00 pm
Supreme Court oral argument in Horne v. [read post]
