Search for: "Marker v. United States"
Results 221 - 240
of 270
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jan 2011, 10:23 am
A mention in this regard may also be made of the developments in the United States and United Kingdom where this right has had [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 4:48 am
Noting the very high threshold for review imposed by the Wednesbury test (see criticisms of this by the House of Lords in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Daly [2001] UKHL 26,[2001] 2 AC 532 and the Strasbourg Court in Smith and Grady v United Kingdom (1999) 29 EHRR 493, para. 138) the Committee considered that the application of a “proportionality principle” by the courts in E&W could provide an adequate… [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 10:00 pm
R (on the application of Zagorski and Baze) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Archimedes Pharma UK Ltd – read judgment The Administrative Court has put down a marker on the potential applicability of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights about the morality of certain trade with the United States. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 11:00 am
United Auto. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 11:23 am
V. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:22 am
Diamond Innovations Inc (EDTexweblog.com) (Docket Report) District Court W D Pennsylvania will revisit and reconsider the standing issue in false marking case: United States of America ex rel FLFMC, LLC v. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 11:46 am
Although the United States appealed both the ruling on Mr. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 4:57 pm
In United States v. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 12:02 pm
Section 292 of the United States Patent Act (35 U.S.C. [read post]
27 May 2010, 11:08 am
Relying upon the United States Supreme Court case Monell v. [read post]
27 May 2010, 11:08 am
Relying upon the United States Supreme Court case Monell v. [read post]
25 May 2010, 4:44 pm
In a 9-0 decision authored by Justice Thomas, the United States Supreme Court reversed, holding that because Section 1132(g)(1) does not use the term “prevailing party,” district court judges have discretion to award attorneys’ fees to either party, even in a situation where there is no judgment in favor of the plan participant. [read post]
17 May 2010, 6:03 am
Lumbermens appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which ultimately affirmed the District Court’s finding of coverage. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 4:32 am
United States, 893 P.2d 345 (Nev. 1995); Smith v. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 12:00 am
In light of recent comments, questions, and Facebook posts, I thought I’d take a moment to clarify some misconceptions about the Supreme Court’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 11:40 am
The Supreme Court’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 6:09 am
I’ve refrained so far from commenting on the Liz Cheney — AQ7 ad, but I want to make one lengthy statement on it and, I hope, leave it at that. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 5:41 pm
United States (1944), the Court approved the President’s executive order in which 120,000 individuals were confined to internment camps based solely on their Japanese ancestry. [read post]
19 Dec 2009, 11:42 am
 Obama and the Democrats would deliver the United States. [read post]
8 Nov 2009, 7:13 am
Miller, 405 F. 3d 700 (8th Cir. 2005); State v. [read post]
