Search for: "The People v. Harper"
Results 1 - 20
of 367
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Mar 2025, 9:05 pm
”[15] Shareholders are people too, however, and so one can argue that the permissive scope of corporate fiduciary duties should allow for the adoption of climate-friendly policies if they generally enhance shareholder “welfare” rather than profits.[16] Also, there is wiggle room in arguments favoring the “long-term” interests of shareholders, though future generations of not-yet-existing “shadow shareholders” are unlikely to be included.[17]… [read post]
15 Mar 2025, 6:54 am
In Matter of Riera v Ayabaca, --- N.Y.S.3d ----, 2025 WL 395851, 2025 N.Y. [read post]
12 Mar 2025, 7:44 pm
Harper (2022) - Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch would have blocked a state supreme court's finding of a partisan gerrymander. [read post]
23 Jan 2025, 9:35 am
A second Court decision, Burdick v. [read post]
19 Nov 2024, 11:37 am
Bruen (2022) and United States v. [read post]
29 Oct 2024, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court in 2006 in Purcell v. [read post]
18 Oct 2024, 3:15 am
In Harper v. [read post]
16 Oct 2024, 12:41 pm
Harper (Major Crimes Act; Indian Status) Comanche Nation v. [read post]
15 Oct 2024, 10:49 am
From People v. [read post]
13 Oct 2024, 9:01 pm
As the Supreme Court made clear in the 1946 seminal ruling in Bell v. [read post]
19 Aug 2024, 6:55 am
U.S. v. [read post]
8 Aug 2024, 11:11 am
Cariou v. [read post]
23 Jul 2024, 12:08 pm
So, people who use a service dog for mental health conditions aren’t eligible. [read post]
23 Jul 2024, 12:08 pm
So, people who use a service dog for mental health conditions aren’t eligible. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:43 am
Source: USPTO Rothschild moved to dismiss the complaint under the Second Circuit’s Rogers v. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 1:12 pm
Harper. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 9:00 am
Harper. [read post]
History Shows the Supreme Court Knows How to Move Quickly, as it Should With the Trump Immunity Case
22 Apr 2024, 5:50 am
Trump v. [read post]
11 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court didn’t address and debunk ISL on the merits (as it later did last summer in Moore v Harper), the Court dismissed Texas’s filing on the ground that Texas lacked standing under Article III because “Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts its elections. [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 4:12 am
"] From B.B. v. [read post]
