Search for: "Duck v. State"
Results 261 - 280
of 806
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Nov 2022, 8:21 am
I still consider affirmance of the Epic v. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 1:00 pm
Cartagena v. [read post]
29 Aug 2009, 12:40 pm
State of Kansas v. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 9:00 pm
Supreme Court called Quill Corp. v. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 9:23 am
In a short response to the Petitioners, Assistant EPA Administrator Stephen Owens stated: After careful review, EPA has determined that TSCA, does not provide the Agency with the authority to address lead shot and bullets as requested in your petition due to the exclusion found in TSCA sec. 3(2)(B)(v). [read post]
29 Nov 2012, 7:49 pm
NRDC v. [read post]
20 May 2022, 11:43 pm
” (or a duck?) [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 9:54 am
Regrettably, today’s post more resembles the children’s game duck, duck, goose. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 2:31 pm
Chubin et al. at 10, Daubert v. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 1:41 pm
Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have committed to advancing in the lame-duck session. [read post]
12 Aug 2010, 1:52 pm
Judge Walker has ordered that the stay of entry of judgment in Perry v. [read post]
14 Aug 2008, 5:20 pm
I have now returned from Australia, a refreshingly democratic country in many respects, though the Australian Senate emulates one feature of our own in giving each of the six states equal representation (12 senators). [read post]
9 Jun 2022, 12:21 pm
In light of what a Federal Circuit panel--Chief Judge Kimberly Moore and Circuit Judges Timothy Dyk and Raymond Chen--said at a Tuesday hearing in Thales v. [read post]
17 May 2016, 10:24 am
” This does not duck the least restrictive means question. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 10:06 am
It's about how to apply the Huawei v. [read post]
20 Mar 2007, 6:15 pm
By Eric Goldman KinderStart.com LLC v. [read post]
26 May 2010, 12:30 pm
McGraw v. [read post]
4 Aug 2007, 9:00 pm
State, __ Md. [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 10:32 am
From the 1st District’s opinion in State v. [read post]
18 Aug 2006, 9:18 pm
She could have ducked the merits by endorsing the government's contention that the case should be dismissed either because of the state secrets privilege or because the plaintiffs lacked standing. [read post]
