Search for: "Strong v. United States" Results 2621 - 2640 of 7,091
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2011, 7:48 pm by Lisa McElroy
Bennett, follow-ups to last year’s controversial campaign finance decision, Citizens United v. [read post]
9 May 2018, 9:40 am by John Elwood
On top of all that, there appears to be a strong federal interest, because the U.S. [read post]
18 Jun 2016, 5:09 am by Elena Chachko
If the 2012 ICJ decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 2:54 pm
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently dismissed for a second time a federal securities class action against American Express Co. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 6:21 am
Malcolm Stewart argued on behalf of the United States, as amicus curiae in support of Reynolds. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 3:00 am
The teachers appealed to the Appellate Division.In a 4 to 1 ruling, the Appellate Division, Third Department, agreed with the lower court.The court applied a two-part test set out in Liverpool CSD v United Liverpool Faculty Asso., 42 NY2d 509. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 7:33 am by Bill Ward
The state’s strongest reaction may be seen in Gallenthin Realty Dev., Inc. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2012, 8:35 am by William McGrath
Specifically, the Court of Appeals found that the Commission and Citigroup "made a strong showing of likelihood of success" in either their appeals or petition for mandamus. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 2:12 pm by Guest Author
He is a former Chair of the ABA Section of Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice, a former Public Member and now Senior Fellow at the Administrative Conference of the United States, and a Fellow at the National Academy of Public Administration. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 2:11 pm by Danielle Citron
Twenty-four State Attorneys General signed an Amicus Brief in support of Arizona, as did the United States. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 2:20 pm by Kenneth J. Vanko
The covenant itself must only prohibit competitive activity requiring the use of trade secrets. -- Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California Opinion Date: 7/1/11 Cite: Richmond Technologies, Inc. v. [read post]