Search for: "California v. Texas"
Results 2741 - 2760
of 4,429
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Apr 2013, 11:31 am
Last year, the Texas Supreme Court decided a case interpreting the Open Beaches Act, Severance v. [read post]
1 Apr 2013, 3:37 am
On October 10, 2012, the Court heard arguments in Fischer v University of Texas at Austin (Dkt No 11-345). [read post]
29 Mar 2013, 10:44 am
Stephen Bright and Sia Sanneh: 'Gideon v. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 4:22 pm
In Lawrence v. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 2:32 pm
Texas, she reached the same result for different reasons. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 4:00 am
Texas. [read post]
25 Mar 2013, 9:30 pm
Two well-funded gay couples from California, one gay, one lesbian, challenged California's proposition 8 in federal court back in 2008, and the case finally will be orally argued tomorrow at the SCOTUS.Their lawyers, Ted Olson and David Boies of Bush v Gore fame, are well-suited to the task of bringing the couples' privacy-based arguments to the Supreme Court. [read post]
25 Mar 2013, 2:03 pm
Predicting the result in Hollingsworth v. [read post]
21 Mar 2013, 7:00 pm
Lawrence v. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 4:35 pm
CVS CaremarkMen's Journal Beats Lawsuit Alleging Violation of California’s “Shine the Light” Privacy Statute -- Boorstein v. [read post]
16 Mar 2013, 9:28 pm
A group of California vineyard operators will be represented in the case of Horne v. [read post]
15 Mar 2013, 4:30 am
District Court for the Western District of Texas 2008). [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 8:45 am
It is now virtually a cliché to write: "As California goes, so goes the nation." [read post]
12 Mar 2013, 3:05 pm
ChriMar Systems, Inc., et al. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2013, 9:26 am
FRENKEL, Latham & Watkins, LLP, of Menlo Park, California, argued for plaintiff-appellee. [read post]
11 Mar 2013, 7:32 am
And in The Washington Post, Robert Barnes profiles the couple behind the challenge to California’s Proposition 8 in Hollingsworth v. [read post]
10 Mar 2013, 10:52 am
In White v. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 1:21 pm
Here are some other interesting pieces of news from the past week: The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Maryland v. [read post]
7 Mar 2013, 2:22 pm
California courts have not addressed whether the statute could apply to online speech but have interpreted the statute narrowly; In Condit v. [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 4:14 pm
The reason the South Carolina (or the Texas) federal court will stay the action as filed is so that the state court action, which began earlier, may finish first. [read post]
