Search for: "State v. Favors"
Results 221 - 240
of 37,243
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 May 2024, 11:30 am
Wade, Griswold v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:55 am
The Supreme Court is currently considering the meaning of “accrues” in the context of suing the United States government in Corner Post, Inc. v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 2:24 pm
Simplot Co. v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 7:25 am
In Raytheon Co. v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
IntegrateNYC, Inc. v State of New York2024 NY Slip Op 02369Decided on May 02, 2024Appellate Division, First DepartmentMoulton, J.Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.Decided and Entered: May 02, 2024 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION First Judicial DepartmentSallie Manzanet-DanielsPeter H. [read post]
8 May 2024, 4:43 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:25 pm
Prominent historical examples, like the liberal justices who advanced press freedom in New York Times v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
7 May 2024, 12:30 pm
Bissonnette v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 10:47 am
Machinists v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:31 am
This is recognized in the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) at 9 FAM § 402.1-3 , which states that an “applicant desiring to come to the United States for one principal purpose, and one or more incidental purposes, must be classified in accordance with the principal purpose. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:43 am
Source: USPTO Rothschild moved to dismiss the complaint under the Second Circuit’s Rogers v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 7:12 am
Per another Supreme Court precedent, United States v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:01 pm
Indeed, according to the FTC’s press release, Commissioner Holyoak voted in favor of the enforcement action “because she has reason to believe that the merger will eliminate substantial head-to-head competition between the parties. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:00 pm
The Court denied Du Pont’s request to review the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s judgment affirming the jury’s $40 million award in favor of plaintiffs, a married couple, asserting negligence claims against Du Pont. [read post]
6 May 2024, 2:34 pm
The accused infringer is much more likely to file the lawsuit in their own state or a state with courts more favorable to their position. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:20 am
See James v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 7:42 am
The case is Carlyle Aviation Partners LLC et al. v. [read post]