Search for: "Sharp v. Sharp"
Results 2361 - 2380
of 4,115
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Sep 2013, 3:24 am
Sharpe to the immigration context would have been remarkable. [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 4:54 am
I then moved my cursor over the earliest cases in the network, which also happened to be one of the largest bubbles (meaning most cited), and it highlighted 1932's Burnet v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 11:25 am
Schuette v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 9:23 am
The presentation elicited sharp reactions from the audience. [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 5:45 am
Observing that a car wash company and its owner “wholly ignore that the ADA prohibits discrimination against those regarded (or perceived) as being disabled,” a federal district court in Tennessee found that the owner’s letter to an employee, in which he stated that the employee was being terminated for medical reasons and that his medical needs could not be accommodated, was direct evidence of disability discrimination (Lovell v Champion Car Wash, LLC, September 3, 2013,… [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 4:35 am
Fox Television Stations v. [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 10:55 am
” United States v. [read post]
29 Aug 2013, 1:20 am
For one example, let me refer you to Philip Elmer-Dewitt's article on how I was right and mainstream media were wrong on the March 1, 2013 Apple v. [read post]
25 Aug 2013, 5:13 pm
At 80, Justice Ginsburg is sharp, on her game, and regularly in the legal news. [read post]
23 Aug 2013, 12:40 pm
Newspaper Club / flickr Last year's Apple v. [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 11:31 am
By Eric Goldman Bently Reserve L.P. v. [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 6:55 am
That was the issue in the recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court in Bradhill Masonry Inc. v. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 9:17 am
Compare Walthal v. [read post]
19 Aug 2013, 6:27 pm
Walling v. [read post]
16 Aug 2013, 3:50 pm
(Eugene Volokh) From Kiennitz v. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 4:15 pm
Sharp disagreement came as the full Circuit Court denied en banc rehearing in a cocaine sentencing case, United States v. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 8:29 am
Reversing a lower court’s ruling that a 52-year old employee failed to show that he was laid off on account of his age, the Sixth Circuit found that his supervisor’s explanation about why the company retained a younger employee, in which he stated that he “had an opportunity to bring the next generation in, so that’s what we decided to do,” and that the company had a succession plan where “you bring in younger people, train them, so when the older people leave,… [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 5:54 am
Here is the United States’ brief and the parties’ briefs in response: United States’ Amicus Brief Sharp’s Response to United States’ Amicus Brief Tribe’s Response to United States’ Amicus Brief The merits briefs are here. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 2:03 am
What I found here that didn’t appear at other sites: “Ask Angie” and “Andi v. [read post]
