Search for: "State v. Elliott" Results 121 - 140 of 502
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Oct 2018, 9:30 pm by Charles Tyler
Supreme Court’s decision in SEC v. [read post]
23 Oct 2018, 3:17 am by SHG
Donegan, however, didn’t write the allegations against Elliott. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 9:30 pm by Bobby Chen
Věra Jourová, EU Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, praised the agreement, stating that “data is the fuel of global economy” and that together the EU and Japan could “shape the global standards for data protection. [read post]
12 Jul 2018, 10:00 am by Adam Faderewski
Attorney Elliott Beck, a member of the 2018 Leadership Academy class, said the idea for the video came from a conversation he had with attorney Sarah Weddington, a former member of the Texas House of Representatives best known for successfully arguing Roe v. [read post]
12 Jul 2018, 5:06 am by Edith Roberts
” At American Thinker, Deborah La Fetra maintains that the “Gift Clause[s]” in state constitutions would prevent states from enacting “workarounds” to the court’s recent decision in Janus v. [read post]
14 Jun 2018, 8:20 am by scanner1
Cox DA 15-0753 2018 MT 149N Criminal – Revocation Elliott and Mondul v. [read post]
14 May 2018, 6:46 am by MBettman
On May 8 2018, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in Elliott-Thomas v. [read post]
10 Feb 2018, 10:59 am by Jason Shinn
A dental hygienist sued (Harris v Hutcheson) claiming she was discriminated against and terminated due to her weight. [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 4:10 am by DR PAUL DALY, QUEENS' COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE
Second, although Lord Carnwath favoured effective supervision as the general rationale for a common law obligation to give reasons, the obligation could be justified in the present case (as in Oakley v South Cambridgeshire District Council [2017] 2 P & CR 4, [2017] EWCA Civ 71: see Mark Elliott’s post) on the basis that “openness and fairness to objectors required the members’ reasons to be stated” (at para 57,… [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 8:11 am by Joy Waltemath
The appeals court agreed that this qualified as a substantial impairment of a contractual relationship under Indiana law, which unlike many state tenure statutes, has been treated as forming “an employment by contract between the teacher and the school corporation” (Elliott v. [read post]