Search for: "Watkins v. Watkins" Results 221 - 240 of 822
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Apr 2011, 3:45 pm by Lisa Larrimore Ouellette
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Microsoft v. i4i Limited Partnership, which examines whether the invalidity defense of 35 U.S.C. [read post]
7 Apr 2013, 2:15 pm by Howard Friedman
Plaintiff claimed that his free exercise rights were violated by authorities' insistence that he cut his dreadlocks because they pose a security risk.In Watkins v. [read post]
29 Oct 2017, 4:09 pm by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 175988 (SD IL, Oct. 24, 2017), an Illinois federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was not allowed to observe the Ramadan fast.In Watkins v. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 10:27 am by Madelaine Lane
Watkins, Case No. 142031 and People v. [read post]
20 Sep 2015, 7:27 am by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 122679 (WD NC, Sept. 15, 2015), a North Carolina federal district court gave plaintiff inmate 20 days to submit evidence that he exhausted administrative remedies in seeking a vegan diet for religious reasons.In Watkins v. [read post]
29 Jul 2008, 3:42 pm
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Cantrell v Wycombe District Council [2008] EWCA Civ 866 (29 July 2008) Bailey v The Ministry of Defence & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 883 (29 July 2008) Blyth Valley Borough Council v Persimmon Homes (North East) Ltd & Ors [2008] EWCA Civ 861 (29 July 2008) Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council v Bainbridge & Ors (”Bainbridge 1″) [2008] EWCA Civ 885 (29 July 2008) G, R (on the application… [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 11:44 pm
" It is one of the most regular users of the IP Enterprise Court.One of its recent targets, Mr Gaughan, runs a bar called the Watkins Folly. [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 11:44 pm
" It is one of the most regular users of the IP Enterprise Court.One of its recent targets, Mr Gaughan, runs a bar called the Watkins Folly. [read post]
3 Aug 2008, 4:10 pm
As described in a July 29, 2008 memorandum from the Latham & Watkins law firm entitled “The ‘Insured v. [read post]