Search for: "Abid v. Abid"
Results 2001 - 2020
of 3,746
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Apr 2015, 1:31 pm
See Binderup v. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 12:30 pm
The Supreme Court in Newburgh v. [read post]
12 Apr 2015, 4:46 pm
One last question: if ISPs have then to abide by the principle of data minimisation, to what extent do retention obligations make such compliance impossible? [read post]
11 Apr 2015, 6:05 am
State v. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 4:01 pm
See People v. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 8:02 am
” United States v. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 4:11 pm
"); 554 US at 625 ("We therefore read [United States v] Miller [, 307 US 174 (1939),] to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapon not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 3:49 pm
(Heller v District of Columbia ["Heller II"], 698 F Supp 2d 179 [D DC 2010]; Ezell v City of Chicago, — F Supp 2d —, 2010 WL 3998104 [ND Ill 2010]).4 Page 4 Penal Law §§ 265.01 and 400.005 Penal Law § 265.01(1) states, in relevant part, that a "person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree when: (1) [h]e possesses any firearm. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 3:36 pm
See also People v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 8:54 am
<> Maple Drive Farms v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 8:51 am
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions <> Maple Drive Farms v. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 6:05 pm
One comes from Commonwealth v. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 12:11 pm
According to the court’s ruling, the public has an “abiding interest” in protecting state laws from “federal encroachment” (Texas v. [read post]
Refusing to cede control of LinkedIn group supports noncompete, trade secret claims against employee
1 Apr 2015, 6:28 am
However, the court dismissed the contract claim based on an employee handbook and an ITSA claim over communications exchanged on LinkedIn among other claims (CDM Media USA, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 1:53 pm
In Maddy v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 1:01 pm
Corey Brettschneider & Nelson TebbeLast week, the Court heard arguments in Walker v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 11:11 am
In Strougo v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 10:17 am
Prior to Honda v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 7:15 am
Supreme Court held, in United States v Windsor, that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)–which defined “marriage” as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife”–was unconstitutional. [read post]
21 Mar 2015, 4:25 am
Bybee v. [read post]
