Search for: "Thomas v. City of Richmond" Results 41 - 60 of 62
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jan 2012, 8:19 am by J. Gordon Hylton
The proposals of Kansas City Athletics owner Charlie Finley to move his struggling team to various cities, including Dallas-Ft. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 12:31 pm by Theodore Shaw
In 1989 he joined a narrow majority in City of Richmond, Va. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 2:56 pm
Law Center) Jim Gibson (Univ. of Richmond School of Law) Eric Goldman (Santa Clara Univ. [read post]
20 Nov 2015, 11:24 am by John Elwood
City of Chicago. [read post]
27 Oct 2011, 3:11 am by Lyle Denniston
Preis, a law professor at the University of Richmond in Richmond, Va. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 8:13 am by Ronald Collins
In December 1833, the American Monthly Review commented on a newly published book by Joseph Story. [read post]
29 Mar 2021, 7:10 pm by admin
Although no rule or statute prohibits side switching, state and federal courts have exercised what they have called an inherent power to supervise and control ethical breaches by lawyers and expert witnesses.[1] The Wang Test Although certainly not the first case on side-switching, the decision of a federal trial court, in Wang Laboratories, Inc. v Toshiba Corp., has become a key precedent on disqualification of expert witnesses.[2] The test spelled out in the Wang case has generally been… [read post]
24 Aug 2019, 6:30 am by Dan Ernst
[We're moving this up, because we've received an updated version of the program. [read post]
13 Apr 2022, 12:43 pm by Ronald Collins
Harlan’s moral vision is memorialized in his lone dissent in Plessy v. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 10:46 am by Sasha Volokh
  But, more to the point: the Supreme Court, far from invalidating private delegations under the Article I Nondelegation Doctrine, has upheld them at least four times: in Butte City Water Co. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2022, 5:01 am by Roger Parloff
In every bid to transfer venue that Capitol riot defendants have raised, the key precedent the government has cited in response has been the same: Haldeman v. [read post]