Search for: "In Re Advisory Opinion of Governor Civil Rights" Results 21 - 40 of 43
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2016, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman and Grant Hayden
Department of Public Health (2003), that it was a violation of the state constitution for the state to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples, the state senate passed a civil union bill—a marriage-equivalent status with a different name—and asked the court for an advisory opinion as to whether its actions had satisfied the judicial mandate. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 6:36 am
Under Section 4(1)(c) of the Right to Information Act (RTI Act), every public authority has the duty to publish all relevant facts while announcing decisions which affect the public. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 7:29 am by Jeralyn
In 2010, they were charged and convicted by a federal jury of a coverup and civil rights violations. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 2:47 pm by Daniel Richardson
       When did the Court stop giving advisory opinions to Governors? [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 9:22 am by Christa Culver
McHughDocket: 10-638Issue(s): Whether the claims of a dual-status National Guard technician alleging employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are jurisdictionally barred by the doctrine of Feres v. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 7:42 am by Steven M. Taber
The following is a summary review of articles from all over the nation concerning environmental law settlements, decisions, regulatory actions and lawsuits filed during the past week. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 12:30 pm by Michael Ginsborg
Recognition of out-of-state marriages - MarylandI posted yesterday on the advisory opinion (94 Op. [read post]
31 Jan 2010, 7:16 pm by admin
The agreement also includes a $3 million civil penalty and an additional $6 million on other environmental projects. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 10:56 am by Erin Miller
Williams (09-466), below, was re-scheduled for review at the January 22 conference. [read post]
30 Nov 2009, 9:25 am by smtaber
— EPA News Release, November 25, 2009 Verizon Wireless has agreed to pay a $468,600 civil penalty to settle self-disclosed violations of federal environmental regulations discovered at 655 facilities in 42 states. [read post]
17 Oct 2009, 5:22 pm
  And let us not forget that despite the 20th Century's great civil rights achievements, when America catches a cold, black America gets pneumonia. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 11:00 am
New York Civil Liberties Union, amicus curiae. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 8:15 pm
Realizing the unpopularity of his position, Dukakis said that his hands were tied by an advisory opinion of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 1:26 pm
Defendant must be resentenced because of the partial acquittal, under the advisory-guideline scheme created by the Booker decision subsequent to his original sentence. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 4:00 am
(Innovationpartners)   Europe ECJ: No simple test for bad faith trade mark registration: Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG v Franz Hauswirth GmbH (IPKat) Court of First Instance: Shells all too common in bakery and confectionery sector: G M Piccolo Srl v OHIM (Class 46) European Parliament votes for greater ACTA transparency (Michael Geist) (Ars Technica) CTM fees to be reduced (Class 46) (Class 46) (Class 46) (BLOG@IP::JUR) (The IP Factor) (Out-Law) (Law360)  … [read post]
19 Jun 2008, 2:35 am
He continued saying that Florida was among the last states to have automatic rights restoration and he was asked while campaigning for Governor if he was considering automatic rights restoration. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 9:47 am
bs Act violations under a color of official right theory, it must satisfy the "property from another" and "with his consent" requirements of 18 U.S.C. section 1951(b)(2). [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 12:12 pm by Thornhill Law Firm, APLC
In contrast, for those opposed to the greater expansion of such media into federal courts, particularly at the district levels, it is argued that such media coverage and camera exposure infringes on a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial and also perhaps upon the Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. [read post]