Search for: "Richard N. v. Superior Court (People) (1981)"
Results 1 - 11
of 11
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Feb 2011, 11:09 am
Thomas, 660 F.2d 680, 686 (5th Cir. 1981); Puricelli v. [read post]
27 Aug 2023, 3:56 pm
The statute covers a very wide variety of federal officers and people acting under the direction of federal officers–including elected officials, federal civil employees, federal law enforcement officers, judges, postal workers, military officers, and more. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 8:13 am
(Richard Posner, ed., 1997). [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
The Court derived the test’s first prong from “the bedrock requirement that ‘the conduct allegedly causing the deprivation of a federal right be fairly attributable to the State,’” asserting that “[a]n act is not attributable to a State unless it is traceable to the State’s power or authority. [read post]
19 May 2016, 6:02 pm
Today, the Supreme Court of California in Winn v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
Superior Court, 751 P.2d 470, 477 n.9 (Cal. 1988); Stevens v. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 10:46 am
" Id.So we're reduced to reading tea leaves here - but with Lohr that's not unusual.With respect to these rather undefined "parallel" claims, the Court in Lohr held that "[n]othing in 360k denies [a state] the right to provide a traditional damages remedy for violations of common-law duties when those duties parallel federal requirements. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 9:22 am
In doing so, he actually hurt people. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 6:50 pm
In doing so, he actually hurt many people. [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 11:39 am
The student will understand the theories used to justify hierarchy and explain why, for example, constitutional law is superior, or of a different character, from ordinary law.II. [read post]
