Search for: "State v. Bias"
Results 1921 - 1940
of 5,335
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 May 2023, 4:31 am
Hussain v. [read post]
6 Apr 2017, 7:15 am
Summary judgment was affirmed, however, on a second disability bias claim. [read post]
11 Aug 2014, 6:02 pm
., Petitioners, v. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 2:19 pm
(Eugene Volokh) The decision came Wednesday, in Suradi v. [read post]
30 Apr 2021, 4:44 pm
Wash) in Straw v. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 7:14 am
The rule in Locke v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 7:09 am
Eisenstein v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 9:54 am
Pretty good year. v [read post]
9 Apr 2017, 1:14 pm
” Bing Shun Li v. [read post]
20 Oct 2021, 8:02 pm
The criteria for favorable exercise of discretion was explained in Matter of C-V-T-, 22 I&N Dec. 7 (BIA 1998). [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 2:22 pm
" … In United States v. [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 2:00 am
In the CNBC report, Mary Himmelstein, an assistant professor at Kent State University, explained that usually, as people interact more with those who are different from themselves and form relationships, bias tends to lessen, but that’s not happening with weight bias. [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 2:00 am
In the CNBC report, Mary Himmelstein, an assistant professor at Kent State University, explained that usually, as people interact more with those who are different from themselves and form relationships, bias tends to lessen, but that’s not happening with weight bias. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 9:51 am
No. 09-6306 Wilson v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 7:13 am
Bias not inferred from purported “irregularities. [read post]
31 May 2024, 11:58 am
Without representation from an attorney, Granier filed his own petition for review from the state prison in Angola, Louisiana, arguing, in Granier v. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
This IMMI goes jointly to the Supreme Court for invalidating most of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in U.S. v. [read post]
21 Feb 2009, 4:57 am
., the Supreme Court will hear Rivera v. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 12:39 pm
Moreover, the State Supreme Court's rule requires the nonmoving party to prove at a hearing not that it did not intend to appeal to racial bias, but that racial bias (perhaps even subconscious bias) had no impact on the jurors. [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 11:35 am
* State v. [read post]
