Search for: "Board of Public Instruction v. State" Results 101 - 120 of 1,445
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 May 2014, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
Board of Education, which put an end to state-enforced racial segregation in schools—a coincidence that was surely intentional on the court’s part. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 10:02 pm by Dr. Mel Kramer
Wash working surfaces (including cutting boards), utensils, and hands after touching raw meat or poultry. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 2:04 pm
Therefore, we advise the Board of Governors that it should accord marital status to its employees who were lawfully married in Massachusetts under the ruling of that state's highest court in Goodridge v. [read post]
21 Jan 2021, 4:36 pm by INFORRM
Alternatively, such proceedings may be brought before the courts of the Member State where the data subject has his or her habitual residence, unless the controller or processor is a public authority of a Member State acting in the exercise of its public powers. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 5:28 pm
For publication opinions today (3): In Terra Nova Dairy, LLC v. [read post]
5 Mar 2021, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Referring to Balbuena v IDR Realty LLC, 6 NY3d 338, the Appellate Division opined that "conflict preemption" occurs "when compliance with both federal and state law is a physical impossibility, or where the state law at issue ... stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 3:15 am
Religious freedom and employmentMarchi v BOCES, 2nd Cir., 173 F.3d 469A school risks violating the Establishment Clause of the U.S. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 5:40 pm
For publication opinions today (4): Bobby Robinson a/k/a Steven Smith v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 8:45 pm by Rantanen
  Her article "Patent Litigation, Personal Jurisdiction, and the Public Good" recently appeared in the George Mason Law Review. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 10:00 pm by Rosalind English
Special advocates are free to make such forensic use of it as is possible in the closed part of the proceedings, but without taking instructions from their client, who of course cannot see the material concerned. [read post]