Search for: "Washington v. Downes"
Results 3341 - 3360
of 5,954
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jan 2014, 1:15 pm
I expect we will see some stores being shut down. [read post]
12 Jan 2014, 8:50 am
Both sides in the case – National Labor Relations Board v. [read post]
11 Jan 2014, 9:09 pm
Arkison, arguing for a Washington State business firm will be Douglas Hallward-Driemeier of the Washington, D.C., office of the Ropes & Gray law firm. [read post]
11 Jan 2014, 9:17 am
Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 9:03 pm
In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 1:04 pm
The Court of Appeals of Washington reaffirmed this rule in McKasson v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 8:25 am
In an op-ed for The Washington Examiner, Gary Shapiro argues that the Court “should weigh in, and rule in favor of Limelight and innovation,” in the patent case Limelight Networks v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 8:24 am
The Department of Justice filed a motion yesterday that would block plaintiffs in Klayman v. [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 7:54 am
” At Forbes (and cross-posted on the Washington Legal Foundation’s blog The Legal Pulse), Richard Samp discusses another case on the January 10 Conference, Republic of Argentina v. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 9:28 am
DRD v. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 8:30 am
The approach in Washington State is a top-down exercise of federal power, pushing lawyers to make sure they meet with their clients, tell them their rights, investigate their cases and represent them zealously in plea negotiations and at trial. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 6:52 am
Briefly: In an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, Floyd Abrams previews this month’s oral arguments in McCullen v. [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 6:19 am
For example, there's a lot of that going on in the Skyhook v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
This IMMI goes jointly to the Supreme Court for invalidating most of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in U.S. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 7:11 am
EEOC v. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 5:38 am
This IMMI goes jointly to the Supreme Court for invalidating most of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in U.S. v. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 9:01 pm
Consumers often want to be compensated for their loss of time, and their sense that a company has let them down. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 8:38 am
This IMMI goes jointly to the Supreme Court for invalidating most of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) in U.S. v. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 11:40 am
An appeal in that case (ACLU v. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 3:30 am
The government isn’t violating Notre Dame’s right to free exercise of religion by letting it opt out, or by arranging for third party contraception coverage.Rick Garnett comments briefly on the decision at Mirror of Justice.Meanwhile, the D.C. federal district court handed down a much longer (94 pages), more complicated and nuanced decision in Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. [read post]
