Search for: "Quick v. United States"
Results 261 - 280
of 2,099
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jun 2024, 3:34 am
Oliver Quick, University of Bristol, Claims for Psychiatric Harm Secondary to Clinical Negligence: Policy v Principle? [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 9:30 am
United States, a case concerning pretrial restraint of assets that prevented the Defendants from hiring counsel of their choice. [read post]
5 Nov 2013, 2:46 pm
United States. [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 4:33 pm
A Quick Primer on NFTs as Art When we call an NFT a work of art, we are using a shorthand that may cause confusion. [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 11:36 am
In a series of cases culminating in State v. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 12:09 am
See United States v. [read post]
22 May 2008, 1:26 pm
See United States v. [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 9:59 pm
Quick and dirty re: elected state judges and campaign money. [read post]
4 Oct 2012, 8:06 am
In an order issued on October 1, 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States denied certiorari in Hadden v. [read post]
8 Jan 2009, 12:32 pm
McKesson Corp., 573 F.Supp.2d 431 (Aug. 26, 2008), the District Court for the District of Massachusetts dismissed a national class action antitrust complaint, borrowing from the recent United States Supreme Court decisions in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. [read post]
4 May 2012, 8:04 am
In United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 11:12 am
Content Regulation * State v. [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 1:13 am
In the case of McDonald v Rappaport et al, Judge Tauro of the United States District Court of Massachusetts, found that the International House of Pancakes is not a fast food restaurant. [read post]
20 Oct 2017, 12:52 pm
Cir. 1994) (finding Garland dicta not controlling); United States v. [read post]
20 Oct 2017, 12:52 pm
Cir. 1994) (finding Garland dicta not controlling); United States v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 10:26 am
Gulf States Reorganization Group v. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 1:51 am
--Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of WisconsinOpinion Date: 5/11/09Cite: Henderson v. [read post]
1 Jul 2018, 8:16 am
…It is of course undisputed that plaintiff sold space to Google, but that alone is insufficient to establish that plaintiff used the Klumba mark in United States commerce. [read post]
23 Apr 2016, 9:16 am
United States v. [read post]
17 Apr 2019, 8:47 am
Although defendants in customs penalty cases are entitled to a jury trial on whether or not they are liable for a violation, the amount of the penalty is not a question for the jury.So says the Court of International Trade in United States v. [read post]
