Search for: "Mode v. State"
Results 61 - 80
of 2,021
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Sep 2023, 11:00 pm
”Florida mode: activated.# # #DECISIONMatter of Nancy A. v Juan A. [read post]
25 Sep 2023, 9:00 am
The Bureau’s outline uses the example of a state foreclosure law. [read post]
21 Sep 2023, 7:48 pm
For instance, in Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. [read post]
15 Sep 2023, 4:00 am
To establish this mode, the defendant family member must have “engaged in behaviour that was calculated to be coercive and controlling” (at p [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
Part 1 of this piece can be found here. [read post]
12 Sep 2023, 10:47 am
Apple Inc. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court next term of Securities and Exchange Commission v. [read post]
4 Sep 2023, 12:17 pm
The case is called Greenberg v. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 12:12 pm
Stickman IV's opinion in Doe v. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 8:55 am
This is significant in two broad sets of cases: those that rely on history to apply a constitutional rule (as lower courts are doing with the historical-analogical test prescribed by New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division opined that contrary to the Employee's contention, the record before the hearing officer contained substantial evidence to sustain the findings of misconduct and, citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d at 1046, and, contrary to the Employee's assertion, noted that "hearsay statements ... were admissible" in a Civil Service Law §75 administrative disciplinary action. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division opined that contrary to the Employee's contention, the record before the hearing officer contained substantial evidence to sustain the findings of misconduct and, citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d at 1046, and, contrary to the Employee's assertion, noted that "hearsay statements ... were admissible" in a Civil Service Law §75 administrative disciplinary action. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 7:45 pm
Richard and Mary Eshelman Faculty Scholar; Professor of Law and International Affairs; Pennsylvania State University | 239 Lewis Katz Building, University Park, PA 16802 1.814.863.3640 (direct) || lcb11@psu.edu First I want to thank Marcelo Thompson, Han Zhu, and Dean Fu Hualing, and all those who organized this workshop. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 10:02 am
This is significant in two broad sets of cases: those that rely on history to apply a constitutional rule (as lower courts are doing with the historical-analogical test prescribed by New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 10:02 am
This is significant in two broad sets of cases: those that rely on history to apply a constitutional rule (as lower courts are doing with the historical-analogical test prescribed by New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
17 Aug 2023, 9:30 pm
This is significant in two broad sets of cases: those that rely on history to apply a constitutional rule (as lower courts are doing with the historical-analogical test prescribed by New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 5:36 am
J. 635, 649 (2023) (“But the revised major questions doctrine has both shifted to an earlier stage in the analysis an purports to specify the appropriate mode of statutory drafting: if Congress wants to allow agencies to reach certain results, it must say so explicitly. [read post]
12 Aug 2023, 3:58 pm
Bas v. [read post]
27 Jul 2023, 6:28 pm
" (Hugh Hall Campbell, KC v. [read post]
26 Jul 2023, 8:53 am
Supreme Court in 303 Creative, LLC v. [read post]
