Search for: "Jackson v. Jackson" Results 181 - 200 of 8,909
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jul 2017, 1:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
Jackson is also often quoted for his statement about the Supreme Court in Brown v. [read post]
4 Apr 2022, 4:30 am by Eric Segall
" Originalism should play such a role, according to McGinnis, because, among other things, Roe v. [read post]
4 May 2010, 5:00 am by Victoria VanBuren
Caroline Jackson, SCOTUS Blog (April 27, 2010) Commentary on Rent-A-Center West v. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
For example, in questioning Judge Jackson last week, Texas Senator John Cornyn repeatedly referred to the right to same-sex marriage, which the Supreme Court recognized in Obergefell v. [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 10:02 am by Deepak Gupta
Jackson (in which a 5-4 majority of the Court upheld the power of arbitration agreements to remove even threshold questions of validity from review by a court) and discussed how the case of Jamie Leigh Jones illustrates the effect of cases like Circuit City Stores v. [read post]
3 Jul 2009, 3:46 am
Jackson Hewitt maintained that it did not need to comply because it is not a "credit service business. [read post]
17 Jan 2010, 11:56 pm by Simon Gibbs
  Jackson LJ wants the new regime in place by October 2010! [read post]
11 Apr 2007, 1:17 am
The debtor, Sheri Jackson, never denied that she used the credit card to purchase the items which, together with finance charges, comprise the debt and that, at some point, she simply stopped making payments on the account. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 5:00 am by Victoria VanBuren
Jackson II: Respondent’s Brief (April 12, 2010) Introducing Karen Halverson Cross and the Arbitration Roundtable (April 13, 2020) Karen Halverson Cross: Guest Post on Rent-A-Center v Jackson (April 15, 2010) Guest Post by Christopher Drahozal on Rent-A-Center (April 15, 2010) Reply Brief in Rent-A-Center West v. [read post]
17 Feb 2011, 9:10 pm by Lawrence Solum
While the Supreme Court professes to follow the tiered scrutiny doctrine set out in cases such as Washington v. [read post]