Search for: "STATE, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES v. Jones" Results 1 - 20 of 205
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Apr 2019, 8:17 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
New York City Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658,694 (1978), by pleading he was wrongfully prosecuted based on an investigation led by the sheriff? [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 2:07 pm
Jones we still have an expectation of privacy in the Social Media Age.I encourage everyone who reads this to reach out to Maryland's legislators to voice support for these bills and to lobby your state legislatures to pass similar legislation. [read post]
It was also alternatively argued that this could not have occurred until some time after 22 December 2011, the date of notification and service of the deprivation order. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 12:54 pm by John Elwood
United States, 21-8190 Issue: Whether this Court should overturn its decision in United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2023, 1:59 am by Matrix Law
R (on the application of Afzal) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 7th June 2023. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 8:43 am by Brett Raffish
Department of Social Services that “Congress did intend municipalities and other local government units to be included among those persons to whom § 1983 applies. [read post]
12 Apr 2015, 11:23 am by Stephen Bilkis
Serv Law §111-s, which allows for access to information contained in government and private records by the department, or a social services district and similar child support enforcement agencies for the purpose of establishing paternity, or establishing, modifying or enforcing an order of support. [read post]
9 Jul 2022, 6:01 am by Benjamin Pollard
Zelin discussed the challenges related to taking groups off the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 7:54 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
One of the abstention doctrines is Younger abstention.The case is Jones v. [read post]
17 Nov 2020, 7:40 pm by Linda McClain
To Justice Barrett’s question about a social service agency raising a religious objection to interracial marriage, Windham answered by citing to Loving v. [read post]