Search for: "State v. First Judicial District Court"
Results 3241 - 3260
of 9,084
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2010, 11:05 pm
" First, the district court erred in its understanding of the law governing the role of the "objective indicia" or "secondary considerations" in the analysis of obviousness. [read post]
13 Sep 2024, 6:47 am
District Chief Judge Lawrence Stengel of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, now a shareholder at Saxton & Stump. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 6:32 am
Here, a preponderance of the evidence supported the district court’s determination that the employee offered money to three former coworkers in exchange for their false testimony on his behalf (Ramirez v. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 6:05 am
Brown v. [read post]
14 Mar 2019, 10:42 am
Finally, the couple stated the arbitrator made an equal campaign contribution to Bays’ judicial opponent. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 4:47 pm
Hollywoodians Encouraging Rental Opportunities (HERO) v. [read post]
24 Sep 2015, 3:03 pm
In Morford v. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 10:40 am
On July 2, 2015, in Glatt v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 4:30 am
Thus, the District Court first decided if the removal was proper and found in the affirmative. [read post]
12 May 2017, 2:00 am
The court stated that the analysis for general jurisdiction is whether “corporation is essentially ‘at home’ in the forum state. [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 2:08 am
The district court had reached the opposite conclusion at the motion to dismiss stage, finding the claims ineligible under the “abstract idea” category of judicial exceptions. [read post]
9 May 2017, 7:30 am
The “presumption of regularity” that attaches to all federal officials’ actions, United States v. [read post]
8 Sep 2007, 12:36 pm
Shortly after this Court's decision, a court in the District of Connecticut enjoined the Government from enforcing the nondisclosure requirement of § 2709(c) insofar as it prevented the plaintiff in that case from revealing its identity as a recipient of an NSL, holding that § 2709(c) failed to satisfy strict scrutiny because it was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. [read post]
23 Sep 2007, 11:46 am
District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan declared Sept. 4 (Fieger v. [read post]
18 Mar 2021, 7:46 am
I omitted 2009 so that I could better evaluate whether the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Pearson v. [read post]
14 Jun 2017, 6:50 am
Alabama 16-7835 Issue: Whether a state court can enforce a rule that Brady v. [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 12:24 pm
In a published opinion filed November 13, 2023, disposing of consolidated appeals, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 6) affirmed judgments denying writ petitions that sought to invalidate a Ventura County ordinance. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 10:55 pm
This case at first seems somewhat difficult to reconcile with State v. [read post]
7 Sep 2018, 1:15 pm
Citizens Coalition Los Angeles v. [read post]
16 Jul 2013, 8:55 am
The state and the Park District jointly prepared the Eastshore State Park General Plan. [read post]
