Search for: "Healy v. James" Results 1 - 20 of 49
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Feb 2024, 8:57 am by John Mikhail
 That is the central reason why James Madison, seconded by James Wilson, first moved on June 1 that the Executive be vested with the power “to appoint to offices in cases not otherwise provided for. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 7:01 am by Randy E. Barnett
(2021) Donald Drakeman, The Hollow Core of Constitutional Theory: Why We Need the Framers (2021) Jamal Greene, How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession With Rights is Tearing America Apart (2021) David Schwartz, The Spirit of the Constitution: John Marshall and the 200-Year Odyssey of McCulloch v. [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 3:45 pm by John A. Emmons
Emma Svoboda outlined the issues at hand in Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. [read post]
11 Nov 2022, 9:19 am by Dawn Mertineit and Katherine Perrelli
This article was originally published in the Boston Bar Association’s Fall 2022 Boston Bar Journal. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 2:29 pm by Randy E. Barnett
(2021) Donald Drakeman, The Hollow Core of Constitutional Theory: Why We Need the Framers (2021) Jamal Greene, How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession With Rights is Tearing America Apart (2021) David Schwartz, The Spirit of the Constitution: John Marshall and the 200-Year Odyssey of McCulloch v. [read post]
26 Jan 2022, 2:58 pm by Eugene Volokh
The court cited the key First Amendment K-12 student cases, and also noted that two college student cases that provided still clearer protection for college students: In Healy v. [read post]
17 Aug 2020, 8:40 am by Randy E. Barnett
(2015) Michael Paulsen & Luke Paulsen, The Constitution: An Introduction (2015) Thomas Leonard, Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics, and American Economics in the Progressive Era (2016) Tara Smith, Judicial Review in an Objective Legal System (2015) Ilya Somin, The Grasping Hand: Kelo v. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 6:14 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In opposition, the sellers failed to raise a triable issue of fact, since they did not produce any expert evidence regarding whether Goodman’s conduct constituted malpractice and caused the sellers to incur damages, and under the circumstances of this case, such expert evidence was required for an evaluation of the adequacy and propriety of Goodman’s actions (see Healy v Finz & Finz, P.C., 82 AD3d 704, 706; Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780,… [read post]