Search for: "State v. Buffington"
Results 1 - 20
of 26
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jan 2024, 4:59 am
Justice Gorsuch wrote in a 2022 dissent from denial of certiorari in Buffington v. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 5:19 am
And, indeed, this is exactly the kind of comparative intuition that Justice Gorsuch relied on in his opinion in Buffington that invoked global practices. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 6:30 am
And, indeed, this is exactly the kind of comparative intuition that Justice Gorsuch relied on in his opinion in Buffington that invoked global practices. [read post]
28 Sep 2023, 6:30 am
One could not confidently say the same of the United States. [read post]
27 Sep 2023, 8:00 am
More specifically, in his opinion last Term dissenting from a denial of cert in Buffington v. [read post]
3 May 2023, 5:36 am
In a 2022 dissent in Buffington v. [read post]
17 Dec 2022, 9:05 pm
All the other cases were decided under Step One or under an exception, such as United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2022, 12:11 pm
Most noteworthy here: In Buffington v. [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 1:09 pm
In Buffington v. [read post]
7 Nov 2022, 12:47 pm
Buffington v. [read post]
2 Nov 2022, 11:43 am
(rescheduled before the June 16 conference; relisted after the June 23, June 29, Sept. 28, Oct. 7, Oct. 14 and Oct. 28 conferences) Buffington v. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 7:59 am
(rescheduled before the June 16 conference; relisted after the June 23, June 29, Sept. 28, Oct. 7 and Oct. 14 conferences) Buffington v. [read post]
13 Oct 2022, 6:28 am
(rescheduled before the June 16 conference; relisted after the June 23, June 29, Sept. 28 and Oct. 7 conferences) Buffington v. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 1:10 pm
First up is Buffington v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 12:20 pm
Jaeger VA Regional Office: Cleveland, Ohio Veteran’s Representative at BVA: The American Legion Date of BVA Decision: July 20, 2017 Date of CAVC Decision: July 12, 2019 The post PRECEDENTIAL CAVC CASE ALERT: Buffington v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 12:20 pm
And Judge Greenberg encapsulated well the obvious concern the majority side-stepped in his dissenting opinion: “Section 3.654(b) does not merely “create a mechanism by which VA manages compensation benefits when veterans return to active duty,” as the majority states, it also creates an unnecessary and inappropriate impediment to a veteran receiving benefits he has already established entitlement to. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 12:20 pm
And Judge Greenberg encapsulated well the obvious concern the majority side-stepped in his dissenting opinion: “Section 3.654(b) does not merely “create a mechanism by which VA manages compensation benefits when veterans return to active duty,” as the majority states, it also creates an unnecessary and inappropriate impediment to a veteran receiving benefits he has already established entitlement to. [read post]
18 Oct 2016, 9:01 am
“Once it has opened a limited forum … the State must respect the lawful boundaries it has itself set. [read post]
19 Apr 2016, 10:17 am
The case, Pena-Rodriquez v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 1:42 pm
" State v. [read post]
