Search for: "Doe v. Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation"
Results 21 - 33
of 33
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jan 2009, 4:42 pm
In Doe v. [read post]
9 Nov 2014, 6:46 pm
It rejects imprisonment as a means of promoting rehabilitation, 28 U. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 11:28 am
” In Matisoff v. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 11:25 am
The existing Indian family exception is a judicially created doctrine holding that the ICWA does not apply to those Indian children who have never been a member of an Indian home or culture and probably never would be.[14] Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians[15], many states adopted the existing Indian family exception. [read post]
Appellate Court Shuts Out Trial Court in CEQA/ESA Double Header under Deferential Standard of Review
3 Apr 2014, 11:08 am
Kindermann In a lengthy and unanimous reversal of the trial court on ESA and CEQA issues in Center for Biological Diversity v. [read post]
21 Jul 2008, 10:53 pm
In Doe v. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 10:00 am
In New York City, multiple dwellings may qualify for tax incentives designed to encourage rehabilitation and improvements (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-243 [previously § J51-2.5]). [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 11:25 am
The existing Indian family exception is a judicially created doctrine holding that the ICWA does not apply to those Indian children who have never been a member of an Indian home or culture and probably never would be.[14] Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians[15], many states adopted the existing Indian family exception. [read post]
12 Nov 2011, 2:22 am
The First Circuit affirmed, concluding that the ATSA clearly eliminates any cause of action under the Rehabilitation Act for TSA screeners. [read post]
20 Apr 2009, 3:27 am
Clearlake Rehabilitation Hospital Inc (Race (B))Paul v. [read post]
26 Nov 2011, 2:08 am
., et al. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 2:14 pm
In the case of Doherty v. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 2:14 pm
The MassHealth regulation at 130 CMR 520.023(C)(1)(d) itself does not support the interpretation given to it by the Office of Medicaid [read post]
