Search for: "Roberts v. Superior Court" Results 21 - 40 of 1,128
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Oct 2023, 9:35 am by John-Paul Boyd KC
Other files have indeed required all of the trappings and folderol of a superior court trial to fairly resolve. [read post]
5 Oct 2023, 1:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
In 1777, Iredell drafted a bill establishing the state’s new court system, including a legislatively elected three-judge Superior Court to serve as the state’s high court. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 7:35 am by Norman L. Eisen
On May 2, 2022, the special purpose grand jury convened, presided over by Superior Court Judge Robert C.I. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 5:36 am by Guest Author
 See, e.g., Jack Michael Beermann, Major Questions, Delegation, Chevron and the Anti-Innovation Supreme Court at 8 (March 9, 2023) (“This article also illustrates how the Court is doing a poor job providing clear instructions to lower courts and other government entities on how and in some cases even whether to apply its doctrines. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 4:00 am by jonathanturley
 For that reason, the Court has often stood with the least popular in our society and, since Marbury v. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 6:13 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
After the Supreme Court invalidated the use of race in college admissions in SFFA v. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 4:33 pm by Barry Barnett
 The same reluctance that infected federal courts appears to have affected antitrust appropriations by Congress too. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 1:03 pm by Ryan Goodman
Welcome to this all-source repository of information for analysts, researchers, investigators, journalists, educators, and the public at large. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 4:15 pm by Bianca Saad
The Court looked at the Rowland factors — a multifactor test articulated in 1968’s Rowland v. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 4:07 am by INFORRM
Last Week in the Courts Fancourt J heard closing submissions in the trial of Various Claimants v MGN. [read post]
26 Jun 2023, 4:30 am by Michael C. Dorf
Superior Court, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a non-resident defendant may be subject to personal jurisdiction in a state in virtue of having been served with process while physically present within the state, even apart from any other contacts the defendant has or doesn't have with the forum state. [read post]