Search for: "LAWS v. DAVIS" Results 2301 - 2320 of 6,272
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Oct 2012, 8:27 am
Aspen Group Resources Corp. as an example.Anthony Davis, a partner with Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP in New York, declared it something that should be completely off limits for law firm members. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 8:12 am by Amy Davis
Note: Attorney Davis originally wrote this post as a contributor for SCOV Law. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 9:05 am by Daniel Hemel
Davis, courts must intervene to strike down state laws that unduly burden interstate commerce because otherwise, we might end up waiting “for decades until Congress can act. [read post]
17 Jul 2016, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
Last week in the Courts On 14 July 2016, Nicola Davies J ordered the hearing of a preliminary issue in the case of Baxmann v Etok. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 9:47 pm
We've followed and written about this one for over two years: Virgin Records America, Inc. v. [read post]
6 May 2013, 5:38 am by INFORRM
On 29 and 30 April 2013, the Court of Appeal (Master of the Rolls, Tomlinson and Ryder LJJ) heard the appeal in the case of AAA v Associated Newspapers (an appeal from the decision of Nicola Davies J, [2012] EWHC 2224 (QB)). [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 9:00 pm
Davis Wright Tremaine Blog-Proud No problem finding the blogs here. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
Parke, Davis & Co., 256 F.3d 1013, 1021 (10th Cir. 2001) (wrong to “construe [a treater’s] ‘heeding’ an adequate warning to mean [s/he] would have given the warning”) (applying Oklahoma law); In re Diet Drug Litigation, 895 A.2d 480, 490-91 (N.J. [read post]
21 May 2007, 8:03 am
Davis, petition, BIO), and on the extent to which Supreme Court decisions against making criminal law decisions retroactive bind the states (Danforth v. [read post]
15 Jul 2008, 1:00 pm
Crawford made some bold pronouncements but left a host of unanswered questions, some of which were later addressed in 2006 when the Court issued Davis v. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 8:22 am
Davis, 905 F.2d at 249 n.2 (citation omitted).Rather, compliance with international law is necessary but not sufficient. [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 5:04 am by Nate Persily
Assuming the Court eschews the minimalism it has exercised in so many election law cases, knocks down the corporate/union electioneering provisions of the BCRA, and overturns Austin v. [read post]