Search for: "Mays v. State"
Results 401 - 420
of 132,409
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 May 2018, 2:03 pm
State v. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 4:07 pm
In State v. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 7:00 am
Here is a recap of May’s filings: Kasprzyk, et al. v. [read post]
31 May 2021, 6:58 pm
In Batson v. [read post]
24 May 2010, 2:13 am
Regina (MJ (Angola)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 557; [2010] WLR (D) 132 “The Secretary of State’s apparently untrammelled discretion contained in s 42(2) of the Mental Health Act 1983 to discharge a patient detained in hospital under ss 37 and 41 of the Act in order to facilitate his or her deportation on the grounds that he had committed criminal offences was to be exercised rationally and in such a way as would not breach the… [read post]
21 May 2012, 6:42 am
Al-Sirri v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 14 – 15 May 2012. [read post]
28 May 2014, 12:42 pm
On May 5, 2014, The Supreme Court announced its decision in Robers v. [read post]
28 May 2014, 12:42 pm
On May 5, 2014, The Supreme Court announced its decision in Robers v. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 2:24 pm
United States. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 2:24 pm
United States. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 11:41 am
See State v. [read post]
10 Feb 2022, 11:17 am
See Crews v. [read post]
1 Mar 2015, 2:22 pm
May 6, 2014). [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 8:16 pm
Here are the criminal cases on the KSC docket for May 1-4, 2017. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 7:46 am
The post State v. [read post]
16 Jun 2011, 11:55 am
Tapia v. [read post]
1 Jun 2020, 1:44 am
Court of Appeals decision in Odumn v. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 2:19 pm
May (The Free State Foundation) has posted Defining Deference Down, Again: Independent Agencies, Chevron Deference, and Fox (Administrative Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 2, p. 433, Spring 2010) on SSRN. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 4:27 am
In Secretary of State for Health v Servier Laboratories Ltd, where the loss arose because there were no generic equivalents of the invalidly-patented drug, the Supreme Court held that the "dealing requirement" laid down in OBG Ltd v Allan [2008] 1 AC 1, which states that the unlawful means should have affected the third party’s freedom to deal with the claimant, is a necessary element of the tort. [read post]
10 Nov 2022, 4:18 pm
(quoting State v. [read post]
