Search for: "Humphrey v. State"
Results 381 - 400
of 553
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2013, 10:30 am
S. 356, 363 (2006) (“[W]e are not bound to follow our dicta in a prior case in which the point now at issue was not fully debated”); Humphrey’s Executor v. [read post]
11 Mar 2013, 6:00 am
Indeed, in 2011, this favoritism policy was the cornerstone of the Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 4:36 am
Yet, in Humphrey v. [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 4:36 am
Yet, in Humphrey v. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 9:09 am
Hill in the category of citizens protected from capital punishment by the 2002 United States Supreme Court decision Atkins v. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 3:21 pm
Some states require the plaintiff to provide a specific trade secret disclosure document before discovery commences. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 3:21 pm
Some states require the plaintiff to provide a specific trade secret disclosure document before discovery commences. [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 2:35 pm
Touchstone Television Productions v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 12:39 am
Humphreys School of Law) has posted The Great and Powerful Oz Revealed: The Ethics and Wisdom of the Scotus Leaks in National Federation of Independent Business v. [read post]
22 Aug 2012, 8:01 am
This modest slap on the wrist is strong evidence that the current conservative Justices will not take on the constitutional status of independent agencies, which were accepted in Humphrey’s Executor v, United States (1935), even though these could be challenged on the ground that the so-called “fourth branch” of government does not fit into the tripartite constitutional structure with its legislative, executive, and judicial branches. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 11:17 am
Humphrey v. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 5:16 pm
By Lee DavisUnited States v. [read post]
30 May 2012, 2:56 pm
In Salas v. [read post]
22 May 2012, 12:08 pm
& Burberry Group, PLC v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 1:18 am
Humphreys v Revenue and Customs [2012] UKSC 18 Supreme Court: paying child tax credit to “main” care giver not discriminatory (under art.14 ECHR) to father who was caring for the child 3 days per week. [read post]
18 May 2012, 6:12 am
@lorrainefleck named an IP tweeter to follow by @ipwatchdog http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/05/11/ip-tweeters-you-should-be-following-on-twitter/id=24741/ Article on beer marketing | A new twist on tried-and-true brews http://bit.ly/JXopz0 Patent Dispute Holds Up Sales of 2 HTC Phones in U.S. http://nyti.ms/KdSRCB US | It’s Tinkerers v. [read post]
17 May 2012, 10:42 am
The specific test under the ECHR for justifying discrimination in the context of state benefits is set out in Stec v United Kingdom (2006) 43 EHRR 1017, a decision of the Strasbourg Grand Chamber. [read post]
17 May 2012, 2:26 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Doyle & Ors v R [2012] EWCA Crim 995 (16 May 2012) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Rehill v Rider Holdings Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 628 (16 May 2012) Sulamerica CIA Nacional De Seguros SA & Ors v Enesa Engenharia SA & Ors [2012] EWCA Civ 638 (16 May 2012) Sucafina SA v Rotenberg [2012] EWCA Civ 637 (16 May 2012) JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov [2012] EWCA Civ 639 (16 May 2012) Durden v Aston [2012] EWCA Civ… [read post]
16 May 2012, 2:49 am
The specific test for justifying discrimination in the context of state benefits was set out in Stec v UK (2006) 43 EHRR 1017, where it was held that with questions of social and economic strategy the Court will generally respect the legislature’s policy choice unless it was “manifestly without reasonable foundation”. [read post]
14 May 2012, 9:45 pm
On that note, employers should be aware of a prior Ninth Circuit decision in Humphrey v. [read post]
