Search for: "LITTLE v. STATE" Results 241 - 260 of 26,677
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Apr 2024, 10:31 am by Daniel Deacon
The descriptive account also suggests that the Supreme Court’s decision in Oil States v. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 4:30 am by Lawrence Solum
Elenis, of a First Amendment objection to state public accommodations laws that the Court avoided in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 5:08 pm by Dennis Crouch
By Dennis Crouch In 1931, the United States Supreme Court decided a landmark case on the patentability of inventions, De Forest Radio Co. v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am by admin
In December 1996, Judge Jones issued his decision that excluded the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses’ proposed testimony on grounds that it failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 702.[5] In October 1996, while Judge Jones was studying the record, and writing his opinion in the Hall case, Judge Weinstein, with a judge from the Southern District of New York, and another from New York state trial court, conducted a two-week Rule 702 hearing, in Brooklyn. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 4:00 am by Eric Segall
In last year's landmark affirmative action case, SFFA v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 12:36 am by centerforartlaw
The European Court of Human Rights in the decision Bayev and others v. [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 9:19 am
 The short summary I prepared fleshes out the themes I hope to cover: Regulatory governance is well within a process of transformation from a managerial system deeply embedded in the classical model of the rule-of-law state grounded in positive (or customary) law pronounced by an authoritative body clothed in the legislative power, to the world of the panopticon and the disciplines. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 6:05 am by George Croner
” While the Second Circuit noted in its decision in U.S. v. [read post]
4 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by Joseph Margulies
I was also counsel—though not lead counsel—in United States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
Indeed, as one federal court recently stated, “the ‘crypto’ nomenclature may be of recent vintage, but the challenged transactions fall comfortably within the framework that courts have used to identify securities for nearly eighty years. [read post]