Search for: "Clark, III v. State" Results 1 - 20 of 339
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Dec 2022, 5:20 am by Bernard Bell
REV. 1263, 1270-71, 1288-89 (2020); Seth Kreimer, Rays Of Sunlight in a Shadow “War”: FOIA, The Abuses of Anti-Terrorism, and the Strategy of Transparency, 11 LEWIS & CLARK L. [read post]
1 Dec 2015, 4:45 am by Sean O'Beirne, Kingsley Napley LLP
On 23 November 2015 the Supreme Court heard a two day appeal of the decision in R (Nouazli) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWCA Civ 1608. [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 2:11 pm by ttetting
Earlier this year, on June 6, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Gallardo v. [read post]
8 Aug 2016, 8:44 am by Ryan Dolby-Stevens, Olswang
The Supreme Court has recently granted him permission to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision in the related case of R (Bancoult (No 3)) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2014] EWCA Civ 708. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 4:10 am by Raj Desai, Matrix
They argued that this was the necessary implication of the finding of the Supreme Court in the case of Munir v Secretary of State [2012] 1 WLR 2192 and Alvi (which were heard together) that the power of the Secretary of State to make or vary the Immigration Rules was wholly statutory and not an exercise of prerogative power: [27]. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 11:34 pm by Gilles Cuniberti
Related posts:New Alien Tort Statute Case At The United States Supreme Court: Kiobel, et al., v Royal Dutch Petroleum Petition Filed In Kiobel, et al., v Royal Dutch Petroleum, et al.,... [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 2:25 pm by almaraz
April 9, 2010 Law Review Spring Symposium website | email Lewis & Clark Law Review The concept of reasonableness is pervasive in the common law tradition and in other aspects of law in the United States. [read post]
23 Nov 2009, 12:56 pm
IJ does not ask the Court in McDonald v. [read post]
16 Oct 2009, 11:50 am
In Part III, I delve more deeply into the nature of supervisory liability and conclude that the Court, although without any real analysis, reached the correct result in IQBAL. [read post]