Search for: "Jones v. Other et al" Results 281 - 300 of 410
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Mar 2014, 4:39 pm by Marty Lederman
  And that is precisely the reading of RFRA that Hobby Lobby, et al., are arguing for in the Supreme Court.Observers such as Doug Laycock are absolutely right that, contrary to popular reports, the Arizona bill would not necessarily—and certainly not expressly—have “given business owners the right to refuse service to gay men, lesbians and other people on religious grounds. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 9:49 pm by Erin Miller
Opinion below (Supreme Court of Wisconsin) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner’s reply Amicus brief of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation Amicus brief of the Institute for Justice Amicus brief of the National Association of Home Builders et al. [read post]
22 Jul 2010, 6:38 am
There is the famous Exxon case, Exxon Corp. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2009, 7:31 am
Khuzami was followed by appointments of two other former federal prosecutors to senior positions: George Canellos, as Director of the New York Regional Office, and Lorin Reisner, as Deputy Director of the Enforcement Division. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 2:20 pm by Erin Miller
Opinion below (6th Circuit) Petition for certiorari (09-533) Petition for certiorari (09-547) Brief in opposition (09-533/547) Brief in opposition for the federal respondent (09-533/547) Petitioners’ reply (09-533) Petitioners’ reply (09-547) Amicus brief of members of Congress (09-533/547) Amicus brief of American Mosquito Control Association et al. (09-533/547) Amicus brief of Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Foundation… [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 9:43 am by stevemehta
Filed 3/29/11 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE JSM TUSCANY, LLC et al., Petitioners, v. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 2:00 pm
Reciting Articles 65(2) and 76 CTMR, it observed that the Court’s scrutiny is limited to the facts, evidence and arguments brought by the parties during the previous proceedings, and to the matters of law thereby examined (Case T-57/03, Société provençale d’achat et de gestion (SPAG) SAS v OHIM). [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 4:00 am by Malcolm Mercer
In 1982, the Supreme Court again addressed and advanced solicitor-client privilege in Descôteaux et al. v. [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 2:00 am by John Day
Page Keeton et al., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 53 at 358 (5th ed. 1984)]). [read post]