Search for: "North v. Peters" Results 21 - 40 of 612
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Sep 2023, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
The justices faced heightened security risks, Thomas noted, after the leak of the court’s majority opinion to overturn Roe v. [read post]
13 Jul 2023, 12:06 pm by Legal Aggregate
Supreme Court amicus brief they filed, along with scholars Christopher DeMuth and Peter Wallison, in Biden v. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 1:03 pm by Ryan Goodman
Ryan (Associate Professor, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) and Thomas J. [read post]
18 Jun 2023, 12:07 am by Frank Cranmer
She appealed, and in Higgs v Farmor’s School [2023] EAT 89 the Appeal Tribunal ruled in her favour, at least provisionally. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 12:16 am by David Pocklington
He cited Lord Fraser in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex p. [read post]
14 May 2023, 6:56 pm
US military leaders have also expressed fears about Beijing's influence on Mexico's communications industry, where 80 percent of telecoms are provided by Chinese companies, according to General Glen VanHerck, commander of both US Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command. [read post]
2 May 2023, 12:30 am by David Pocklington
The judgment also required an assessment of the effect on the structure without an identical weight on the north roof. [read post]
1 May 2023, 4:36 am by Peter J. Sluka
  Not according to a recent case out of North Carolina, Mason v Mason 2022 NCBC 24 (May 13, 2022). [read post]
30 Apr 2023, 12:37 am by Frank Cranmer
The former concerns the application of data on the PV panels on the North Roof of the chapel, on which there was disagreement between the Petitioners and the CBC. [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 1:00 am by David Pocklington
The Church Building Council also questioned whether panels on the north side of the roof could generate enough energy to justify them. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 4:40 am by Phil Dixon
North Carolina’s crime of making derogatory reports about candidates for office likely violates the First Amendment; denial of preliminary injunction reversed for further findings Grimmett v. [read post]