Did you mean: Roe v. Carter et al ?
Web Results

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is a landmark decision issued in 1973 by the United States ... Full case name, Jane Roe, et al. v. ...... President Jimmy Carter supported legal abortion from an early point in his political career, in order to ...

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1711161.html

Case opinion for US 7th Circuit ROWE v. GIBSON. ... Monica GIBSON, et al., Defendants–Appellees. ...... Carter, ––– F.3d ––––, 2015 WL 4567899 (7th Cir.

www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914c2adadd7b049347c131f

The appellee, Lena Rowe, was the prevailing party in a medical malpractice action ... generally awarded attorney fees to the prevailing party in all civil litigation.

www.tsc.state.tn.us/sites/default/files/rowe_leonard_opinion_final.pdf

Jul 13, 2015 ... Assigned on Briefs April 15, 2015. LEONARD ROWE v. HAMILTON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for ...

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113

A person may choose to have an abortion until a fetus becomes viable, based on the right to privacy contained in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth ...

www.law360.com/cases/5899b315f99db62c86000001

Parties, docket activity and news coverage of federal case Barre et al v. Carter et al, case number 2:17-cv-01057, from Louisiana Eastern Court.

www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/family-law/family-law-keyed-to-weisberg/child-custody/rowe-v-franklin

Citation. Rowe v. Franklin, 105 Ohio App. 3d 176, 663 N.E.2d 955, 1995 Ohio App. LEXIS 2811 (Ohio Ct. App., Hamilton County June 28, 1995) Brief Fact.

www.quimbee.com/cases/united-states-v-rowe

A summary and case brief of United States v. Rowe, including the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, key terms, and concurrences and dissents.

ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2157&context=ulj

Nov 28, 2007 ... See Rowe v. .... R. 47. Alabama Great S. R.R. Co., 11 So. at 806. 48. Carter v. Tillery, 257 .... See, e.g., Cavers et al., Comments on Babcock v.