Search for: "In re Anthony F. " Results 201 - 220 of 392
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
The petitioner, Anthony Douglas Elonis, was prosecuted and convicted of threatening his estranged wife, the state and local police, a kindergarten class, and an FBI agent. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 10:14 am by John Elwood
”  Elonis is an interesting case for a number of reasons, not least of which is that it gives the Court another chance to work the f-word into the United States Reports. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 2:00 pm by Don Cruse
Grants of Review TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF AGING AND DISABILITY SERVICES A/K/A BRENHAM STATE SCHOOL, ANTHONY V. [read post]
23 May 2014, 1:39 pm by Schachtman
In re School Asbestos Litigation, 977 F.2d 764 (3d Cir. 1992). [read post]
13 May 2014, 6:35 pm
In discharging this duty to review fees, the court cannot apply a selected few factors which might be more favorable to one position or another but must strike a balance by considering all of the elements set forth in Matter of Potts, and as re-enunciated in Matter of Freeman. [read post]
4 May 2014, 7:58 pm by Barry Barnett
The court's ruling in In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation, 552 F.3d 305 (3d Cir. 2008), set the stage for a case that I had the privilege to argue to the U.S. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 1:07 pm by Craig Whitney
Universal City Studios, Inc.] recognized they can do when they’re in [their] home and they’re moving the equipment . . . . [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 2:04 am
" On the specimen of use, shown below, the mark included the word COMMUNITY within the letter "I":In re Scheucher, Karl F., Serial No. 85529532 (April 22, 2014) [not precedential], concerned an application to register the mark SIPS in standard character form, for various goods in class 9. [read post]
12 Feb 2014, 7:38 am
” The study found no significant difference between participants and the control group in prison infractions, number of re-arrests, or time to re-arrest. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 10:16 am
The Court of Appeals’ contrary analysis rests on its misreading of In re Douglas D., 2001 WI 47, 243 Wis. 2d 204, 626 N.W.2d 725. [read post]