Search for: "WILLIAMSON v. STATE"
Results 421 - 440
of 969
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jul 2015, 11:16 am
This was the approach first taken by the Warren Court in 1955 in Williamson v. [read post]
1 Jul 2015, 7:34 am
United States[13], the district court refused to enforce plaintiff’s Rule 45 subpoena that sought documents from defendant’s expert witness. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 8:27 pm
Last year, in Loving v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 12:16 pm
” Brown & Williamson, 529 U. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 7:39 am
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U. [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 7:42 am
Williamson v. [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 6:00 am
Carhart (the case upholding a federal ban on partial birth abortion), the analysis has proceeded by first asking whether there is a rational basis for the state’s action (under the loose, hands-off posture of Williamson v Lee Optical there almost always is), and if so, whether pursuing that goal imposes an undue burden on women’s access to abortion. [read post]
10 Jun 2015, 11:30 am
The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s ruling, explaining that “Under FOIL, agency records are presumptively available for public inspection, without regard to the need or purpose of the applicant, unless the requested documents fall within one of the exemptions set forth in Public Officers Law §87(2)," citing Williamson v Fischer, 116 AD3d 1169, leave to appeal denied, 24 NY3d 904.The court said that "[e]xemptions are narrowly construed,… [read post]
10 Jun 2015, 11:30 am
The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s ruling, explaining that “Under FOIL, agency records are presumptively available for public inspection, without regard to the need or purpose of the applicant, unless the requested documents fall within one of the exemptions set forth in Public Officers Law §87(2)," citing Williamson v Fischer, 116 AD3d 1169, leave to appeal denied, 24 NY3d 904.The court said that "[e]xemptions are narrowly construed,… [read post]
5 Jun 2015, 9:33 am
” Hugh Williamson: an express prohibition on ex post facto laws by states “may do good here, because the Judges can take hold of it. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 7:50 am
” Hugh Williamson of North Carolina argued that an express prohibition on ex post facto laws by states “may do good here, because the Judges can take hold of it. [read post]
18 May 2015, 2:18 pm
Or as another court decision, Williamson v. [read post]
14 May 2015, 2:36 pm
In fact, under the Supreme Court’s 1985 decision in Hamilton Bank v. [read post]
7 May 2015, 11:50 pm
Enter the entertaining case of Williamson v Khan. [read post]
4 May 2015, 3:27 pm
Williamson v Khan. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 8:00 am
Williamson and Dr. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 4:30 am
Two years later, Mother married an officer in the United States Navy. [read post]
25 Feb 2015, 2:04 pm
”“The sentencing judge did not err in finding the sentence proportional to the gravity of the offence,” said the three-judge panel in its decision in R v. [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 10:04 am
Williamson, 101 Ark. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 6:37 am
It was “no stretch of the imagination” to find the convictions rationally related to job circumstances requiring a need to remain polite and professional when faced with time and interpersonal stresses (Williamson v. [read post]
