Search for: "Taylor v. State" Results 321 - 340 of 3,304
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 May 2022, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
National/Federal A 49-Year Crusade: Inside the movement to overturn Roe v. [read post]
9 May 2022, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
Campaign Finance South Carolina: “SC GOP Lawmaker Settles 133 Alleged Campaign Finance Violations for Fine, Public Reprimand” by Zak Koeske (The State) for MSN Elections Florida: “Appeals Court Reinstates Florida’s 2021 Election Law Provisions Struck Gown by Judge” by Steven Lemongello (Orlando Sentinel) for MSN Georgia: “Challenge Over Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Eligibility Fails” by Kate Brumback (Associated Press) for Yahoo News … [read post]
1 May 2022, 4:30 pm by INFORRM
The Brett Wilson Media Law Blog has an article summarising and commenting on the 30 March 2022 judgment of Chief Constable of Kent Police & Anor v Taylor [2022] EWHC 737 (QB), in which Saini J allowed a claim for breach of confidence arising from the Defendant’s refusal to delete videos that a law firm that had accidentally disclosed to him and which contained sensitive information about a vulnerable minor. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 1:34 pm by Mark Walsh
In a December case, United States v. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 4:22 am by Emma Snell
“As in any situation where armed forces are used, everything will end with a treaty,” Lavrov said in an interview with state television. [read post]
19 Apr 2022, 3:49 am by Derek Muller
Raffensperger, which allows an state administrative hearing over Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s qualifications to proceed. [read post]
12 Apr 2022, 11:46 am by John Elwood
Dennis noted that the Supreme Court had only recently in Taylor v. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 9:00 am by Phil Dixon
There was therefore no error in the case. (1) Defendant’s challenge to the second step of the Batson analysis was preserved; (2) The State’s proffered explanations for its use of peremptory challenges were racially neutral; (3) The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the defendant failed to show purposeful discrimination under the totality of circumstances State v. [read post]