Search for: "In Re Disciplinary Action Against Hanson"
Results 1 - 6
of 6
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Mar 2011, 12:52 pm
By Beth Hanson, with George Lenard In Part I last week, we introduced and explained the Supreme Court’s February 28 “cat’s paw” ruling in favor of the plaintiff in Staub v. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 9:35 am
They'll try every trick in the book because they're bad people. [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 8:55 am
Essentially, a court can say, “The line may be fuzzy, but we’ll know when we’re crossing it – and we’re nowhere close in this case. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 4:38 am
There are myriad law review articles talking about the candor issue; in a Yale Journal of Law and Technology article with a regrettably silly name, Ellie Margolis concluded “Perhaps because of the difficulty in determining when failure to cite adverse authority is due to intentional deception, it is extremely rare for Rule 3.3 to be the basis of a disciplinary action,” citing as an exampl [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 12:00 am
A review found hundreds of them echoed calls to action boosted online by Republican political figures and conservative social media pages that also have promoted the state Senate’s controversial review of the 2020 election in Maricopa County. [read post]
10 Jul 2020, 3:00 am
Advocates for the electors countered that allowing states to regulate the actions of electors could be a back-door way for states to add qualifications for presidential candidates, perhaps by instructing electors to vote for only those who had released tax returns. [read post]
