Search for: "Billings v. Billings"
Results 201 - 220
of 29,885
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Aug 2022, 9:15 am
Myriad Genetics, Inc., 133 S.Ct. 2107 (2013) and Mayo Collaborative Services v. [read post]
14 May 2021, 8:01 am
Republicans offered amendments to all three bills that would have provided that a public company need not make a disclosure unless the thing to be disclosed met the materiality standard expressed by the Supreme Court in TSC Indus., Inc. v. [read post]
10 Feb 2007, 11:12 am
Reference re Alberta Statutes (1938) Boucher v the King (1951) Saumur v City of Qc (1953) Switzman v Elbling (1957) AG Canada v Dupond (1978) Ontario Public Service Employees’ Union v AG Ontario (1987) Canadian Bill of Rights (1960) R v. [read post]
23 Nov 2021, 7:52 am
[The bill cuts health care funding in states that refused to accept the ACA's Medicaid expansion in ways that might violate NFIB v. [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 8:24 am
The Virginia House of Delegates passed two of the strictest anti-abortion bills in the nation on Tuesday, and opponents say it’s part of a strategy which would make abortion illegal immediately if the Supreme Court were to overturn Roe v. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 5:37 am
In the case of East Longmeadow Management Systems v. [read post]
24 May 2019, 3:59 am
” Since the likelihood today is that the two highest-profile cases testing new laws as forbidden “bills of attainder” both involve President Trump or his Administration in one way or another, it is useful to note that the Supreme Court went the furthest to spell out the meaning of the clause in a famous decision in 1977, Nixon v. [read post]
29 Apr 2021, 8:26 am
Yes, according to the Indiana Court of Appeals’ recent opinion in Gladstone v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 11:05 am
While the end goal of anti-choice forces remains overturning Roe v. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 3:10 pm
While this bill is not a comprehensive solution to overbroad and unconstitutional surveillance, EFF urges the Senate to pass the bill without any amendments that will weaken it. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 11:56 am
In Chindarah v. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 2:17 pm
In State v. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 5:31 am
While Indian courts have been satisfied with executive sanction and review in the past, there is a strong case to be made that judicial review of surveillance is a “constitutional imperative” after the Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in Puttaswamy v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 9:56 pm
There may once have been a stage when “the Court can (and should unless there is evidence to the contrary) assume that his signature to the bill of costs shows that the indemnity principle has not been offended” (Bailey v IBC Vehicles Ltd [1998] EWCA Civ 566) but the world has now moved on from such innocent days. [read post]
18 Oct 2021, 4:41 am
And how will the bill do this? [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 3:43 am
The Bill has proposed various changes to the Copyright Act. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 2:13 am
The Court's opinion in McDonald v. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 12:53 pm
The William & Mary Institute of Bill of Rights Law announces the case for its Supreme Court Preview this year; it's Schwarzenegger v. [read post]
19 Jun 2019, 3:11 pm
(citing Sherbert v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 9:47 am
Introduced by Assemblyman Phil Steck on January 15, 2015 and by State Senator Andrew Lanza on March 20, 2015, the bill (A2147/S4447) is entitled “Policy Against Restraint of Trade,” and operates from the premise that the Court of Appeals decision in BDO Seidman v. [read post]
