Search for: "STANFORD v. STATE" Results 21 - 40 of 1,984
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 May 2022, 7:16 am by Rick Hasen
SYMPOSIUM – 2022 – SAFEGUARDING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO VOTE The Post-Trump Rightward Lurch in Election Law by  Michael Kang  on  April 29, 2022 The United States Supreme Court’s decisions last Term, Brnovich v. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 8:25 am by CMS
On 19 January 2022, the Supreme Court heard the appeal in Stanford International Bank Ltd (In Liquidation) v HSBC Bank Plc. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 5:25 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 27/4/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard 13th-14th October … [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 10:36 am by Eugene Volokh
(Many thanks to Phil Malone at Stanford's Juelsgaard Clinic for collaborating on the amicus brief at a difficult time)…. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 9:45 am by Paul Levy
(Many thanks to Phil Malone at Stanford's Juelsgaard Clinic for collaborating on the amicus brief at a difficult time). [read post]
6 Apr 2022, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
The abstract:It would be difficult to overstate the centrality of Brown v. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 3:43 am by Jocelyn Hutton
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 28/3/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard 13th-14th October… [read post]
23 Mar 2022, 2:04 pm by NARF
Pollack (Cultural Resources; National Historic Preservation Act; Tribal Consultation) State Courts Bulletin https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2022.html J.P. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2022, 5:14 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
  The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 23/3/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard… [read post]
14 Mar 2022, 2:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 16/3/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard 13th-14th October … [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 4:23 am by Jocelyn Hutton
On Friday 11 March the Supreme Court will hear an assessment of costs hearing in Secretary of State for Health and another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and others, on appeal from [2019] EWCA Civ 1096. [read post]
28 Feb 2022, 2:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
  The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 02/03/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 Bott & Co Solicitors v Ryanair DAC, heard 20 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors,… [read post]
27 Feb 2022, 1:56 pm
Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior Univ., 489 U.S. 468, 474 (1989) (“The interpretation of private contracts is ordinarily a question of state law . . . . [read post]