Search for: "State v. Taylor "
Results 2981 - 3000
of 3,342
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jul 2008, 4:50 am
" The law could be upheld only if the state could show it served a significant local interest that could not be furthered by a non-discriminatory law--this Oklahoma could not show.Maine v Taylor (1986) is a rare example of a Supeme Court decision upholding a state statute that discriminated against out-of-state commerce. [read post]
8 Jul 2008, 3:59 pm
In the Pennsylvania case of Taylor v. [read post]
3 Jul 2008, 7:26 pm
Taylor applied Ohio law.Kent v. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 4:08 pm
State of Indiana (NFP) Willie Erving Taylor v. [read post]
1 Jul 2008, 6:57 pm
This was not the first time the Court confronted this issue, for 10 years earlier in Taylor v. [read post]
28 Jun 2008, 11:06 pm
Taylor, D. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 5:46 pm
Rogers Media Inc.For more discussion of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in the John Ross Taylor case referenced in the CHRC ruling, see our December 17, 2007 post, Mark Steyn, Macleans and Canadian Human Rights. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 2:55 pm
Taylor, No. 06-30580 (6-26-08). [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 2:22 pm
Oct. 1, 2007); Taylor v. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 10:12 am
Supreme Court's landmark school-desegregation decision of Brown v. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 3:36 am
State, 885 So.2d338, 355 (Fla.2004) (quoting Gaskin v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 6:15 pm
Yusuf, No. 07-3308 Unpaid taxes are "proceeds" of mail fraud for purposes of sufficiently stating an international money laundering offense. . [read post]
18 Jun 2008, 4:59 pm
" Sheryl Crowder Taylor v. [read post]
17 Jun 2008, 1:20 am
Scope of arbitration Richfield Springs CSD v Allen, App. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 6:53 pm
In Progress Energy v. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 2:16 pm
Taylor (07-539). ** Whether it is unconstitutional for a state — here, Illinois — to ban the production of a food item, if all of the product is exported to other countries. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 10:06 pm
United States v. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 3:40 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: ECJ rules trade mark holders cannot stop honest comparative advertising: O2 Holdings Limited and O2 (UK) Limited v Hutchinson 3G UK Limited: (Out-Law), (Catch Us If You Can!!!) [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 9:56 pm
From: Findlaw Opinion Summaries June 12, 2008: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AEROSPACE & DEFENSE, CIVIL PROCEDURE, GOVERNMENT LAW, TRADE SECRETS Taylor v. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 4:23 pm
The unanimous opinion by Justice Ginsburg in Taylor v. [read post]
