Search for: "State v. Mark" Results 3381 - 3400 of 19,838
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Jul 2022, 6:25 am by Eleonora Rosati
This very question was addressed a few days ago in the judgment that the General Court (GC) rendered in Zdút v EUIPO, T-250/21 (NEHRA). [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 7:22 pm
"High court to hear enemy combatant case": Mark Sherman of The Associated Press has a report that begins, "The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether the president may order that people picked up in the United States be detained indefinitely and without criminal charges. [read post]
18 Jul 2019, 3:52 am by Edith Roberts
At Education Week’s School Law Blog, Mark Walsh reports that “in dozens of education cases in his more than 34 years on the court,” Stevens “was a voice for student rights, racial equality, and a high wall of separation between church and state. [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 2:56 am
  The insurer appealed the trial court decision and the state appellate court relied partially on the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision in Chauvin v. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 1:09 pm by Dennis Crouch
Accordingly, the PTO’s absolute ban on the registration of marks such as TRUMP TOO SMALL is far more extensive than necessary to protect the right of publicity, which would not prevent the use of TRUMP TOO SMALL under any state’s right of p [read post]
11 Jan 2018, 4:49 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
It relies heavily on the writing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who aided opponents of gerrymandering in a crucial but often overlooked 2015 opinion…In 2015, however, Ginsburg seized upon a tangential case, Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 12:44 pm by Kiera Flynn
Today marks the beginning of SCOTUSblog’s symposium on the future of class action lawsuits. [read post]
6 Sep 2018, 1:43 pm
” Areeda & Hovenkamp §5.02; accord, Kalinow­ski §24.02[1]; United States v. [read post]
6 Jul 2016, 5:00 am by Kate Fort
This filing is part of the ICWA class action case in South Dakota over the interpretation of 25 USC 1922 (emergency jurisdiction): The third reason why this Court’s ruling on § 1922 has been inoperative is because the State’s Attorney for Pennington County, Defendant Mark Vargo, and the person Mr. [read post]