Search for: "GARNER v. PENNSYLVANIA" Results 21 - 40 of 116
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jun 2014, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Cummins, The Legal IntelligencerJune 10, 2014Dear Pennsylvania appellate court judges:This respectful yet cogent plea for appellate guidance in post-Koken civil litigation matters is prompted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's surprising and disappointing recent denial of the petition to appeal in the notable case of Stepanovich v. [read post]
12 Sep 2018, 1:48 pm by David Super
  The traditional route for amending the Constitu­tion through Article V requires that any proposed amendment garner two-thirds support in the House. [read post]
19 Mar 2011, 12:45 pm by Moria Miller
Partnering Against Poverty: Examining Cross-Disciplinary Approaches to Public Interest LawyeringBy Jenny Chung C’12A diverse array of panelists ranging from public-interest lawyers to academics to experts across various disciplines convened to discuss poverty issues within both Philadelphia and the broader national context at the University of Pennsylvania Law School’s 30th annual Edward V. [read post]
29 Mar 2013, 3:58 am by Lorene Park
In the age column, a 60-year-old project manager at a Pennsylvania dental school, who was replaced by the dean’s 30-year-old research assistant when his job was eliminated and a new position encompassing his duties was created, was allowed to go to trial on his ADEA and state law age discrimination claims (Sullivan v Temple University, March 5, 2013, No. 11-7305). [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 6:31 am by Amy Howe
At casetext, Colin Starger characterizes last Term’s decision in Ohio v. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 6:24 am by David Markus
Supreme Court case in 2009, Flores-Figueroa v. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 7:05 am by Jordan Bublick
Supreme Court was presented with the use of "substanially" in the context of "substantially burden[ing] a person's exercise of religion"  Burwell v. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 4:56 am by Joy Waltemath
Summary judgment was thus denied in part (Johnson v Federal Express Corporation, February 10, 2014, Conner, C). [read post]