Search for: "State v. Core" Results 2461 - 2480 of 7,964
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Sep 2010, 12:28 pm by Anna Christensen
Today’s first petition of the day is: Title: Core Communications, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Sep 2008, 11:24 am
(Citations omitted)Because the lower court did not have the benefit of the Tellabs decision, the appellate panel vacated the order and remanded the case for further review in light of recent case law.South Ferry LP v. [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 2:34 pm
I was recently interviewed for an article in a state bar journal. [read post]
19 Oct 2015, 8:52 am by Lyle Denniston
  At the core of each is the language of the Federal Power Act that assigns wholesale pricing to FERC regulations, and leaves retail pricing to state and local rules. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 6:03 am by SHG
The Supreme Court's decision in Turner v. [read post]
22 Nov 2008, 6:47 pm
An article in this week's Yale Herald titled Gay Couples Marry as Campus Christians Sit Silent is occasion to look more closely at developments in Connecticut.In Kerrigan v. [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 3:30 pm by Barry Sookman
One of the most important, if not the most important, United States copyright cases decided in 2013 is The Authors Guild, Inc. v Google Inc. 2013 WL 6017130 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
27 Oct 2018, 7:52 am by INFORRM
  Although, in R v Chaytor, the Supreme Court had no serious free speech issues to contend with, the decision suggests the court can decide matters ostensibly concerning Art IX where there is ‘no adverse impact on the core or essential business of Parliament’ ([48]). [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 6:46 am by emp
As the SCC noted in R. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2022, 1:16 pm
At the core of these principles is an important new one, though one that waits for greater elaboration elsewhere--the need for reasoned decision making subject to broad review by the courts (e.g., Dept of Commerce v, NY, No. 18–966. [read post]
24 Mar 2017, 7:24 am by Joy Waltemath
Although the court granted summary judgment in her favor on her state-law marital status discrimination claim, it denied the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment on her state and federal gender and pregnancy bias claims (Richardson v. [read post]