Search for: "United States v. District Court" Results 201 - 220 of 38,499
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 May 2024, 8:08 am by Kalvis Golde
United States, Khadr asks the justices to grant review and reverse the D.C. [read post]
1 May 2024, 4:00 am by Eric Segall
United States oral argument reminded me of how little the Roberts Court has actually cared about rule of law values and legal transparency during its 18-year run. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 12:52 am by centerforartlaw
Most art law decisions come out of federal district courts, reflecting the impact of federal law on art law. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 5:04 pm by Eugene Volokh
" The court held for defendants, reasoning thus: Daniel's Law … was named for Daniel Anderl, the son of United States District Court Judge Esther Salas. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 9:36 am by Rebecca Tushnet
The district court enjoined further infringing uses of Hetronic trademarks “within and outside of the United States. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 8:11 am by Tim K. Garrett and Maja Hartzell
In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a lateral job transfer can – in certain circumstances – be an illegal adverse action and support a claim for a lawsuit for unlawful discrimination. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 2:40 am by INFORRM
United States As mentioned above, the US Senate has voted in favour of legislation that could ban TikTok in the country if its Chinese owners refuse to sell. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 3:08 pm by Thomas B. Griffith
IRS, No. 22-1308 is an appeal from the United States Tax Court. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 11:33 am by admin
In a consumer diacetyl exposure case (claiming bronchiolitis obliterans), a federal district court excluded Egilman’s causation opinions as unreliable. [read post]
27 Apr 2024, 2:40 pm by Marty Lederman
 Moreover, at least three important precedents--United States v. [read post]
27 Apr 2024, 2:02 pm by Dennis Crouch
Cir. 1973) (holding that Section 6(g) “empowered [the FTC] to promulgate substantive rules of business conduct”); United States v. [read post]