Search for: "United States Solicitor General"
Results 2441 - 2460
of 4,871
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2014, 8:36 am
The Solicitor General recommended that the Court pass on hearing this particular case. [read post]
1 Jul 2014, 7:30 am
The applicant was represented before the Court by Mr Sanjeev Sharma, a solicitor practising in Birmingham, Mr Ramby de Mello and Mr Tony Muman, barristers practising in Birmingham, and Mr Satvincer Singh Juss, a barrister practising in London.The French Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, initially Ms Edwige. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 3:13 pm
Wong and United States v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 7:32 am
AIB Group (UK) plc v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors, heard 5 June 2014. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 8:36 am
Wong, 13-1074, and United States v. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 7:49 am
Unclear, but it has something to do with past practices and the Solicitor General’s concessions and essentially nothing to do with the text of the U.S. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 7:14 am
California and United States v. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 1:42 pm
United Artists Television, Inc. and Teleprompter Corp. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 1:42 pm
United Artists Television, Inc. and Teleprompter Corp. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 1:42 pm
United Artists Television, Inc. and Teleprompter Corp. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 9:50 pm
Over at the New York Times, Linda Greenhouse argues that the results in United States v. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 6:35 pm
California and United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 4:01 pm
In the amicus curiae brief filed by the Solicitor General in Bruch,he did his best to keep the Supreme Court from wandering off track and ignoring Congress. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 1:15 pm
United States. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 12:57 pm
The Court’s selection of these cases, quite irrelevant to its discussion, appears to have come from the Solicitor General’s amicus brief in Matrixx.[2] Although cited for an irrelevant proposition, the Supreme Court’s selection of the Best’s case was puzzling because the Sixth Circuit’s discussion of the issue is particularly muddled. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 11:38 am
Solicitor General to deny review, the Court turned aside a test case on patients’ right to sue in state court over the failure by makers of medical device to warn doctors and patients of harmful side-effects. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 2:44 am
AIB Group (UK) plc v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors, heard 5 June 2014. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 5:55 pm
It includes, among other things, a survey of the advertising laws in leading jurisdictions including Australia, Canada, China, the United Kingdom and United States, among a number of other key and emerging jurisdictions. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 10:17 am
” While private parties can bring suits under the Lanham Act, they cannot bring private actions to enforce the FDCA, which is almost exclusively enforced by the United States government. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 11:00 am
Pursuant to the express word of the United States Supreme Court itself. [read post]
