Search for: "Ellis v. State" Results 341 - 360 of 903
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 May 2016, 10:42 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Redbox Disney Not Liable For Disclosing Device IDs And Viewing Habits App Users Aren’t “Subscribers” Under the VPPA–Ellis v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 12:46 pm by Immigration Prof
Oklahoma Photo via the Boston Public Library You've no doubt spent today glued to the internets scouting for word about United States v. [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 2:12 am by Dennis Crouch
Kirkland & Ellis Supreme Court lawyer Jay Lefkowitz filed the petition with Bruce Gerstein on the other side. [read post]
1 Apr 2016, 8:56 am by Eugene Volokh
A later court decision fortunately reversed this order, which was clearly unconstitutional; and Wednesday the Massachusetts high court (Van Liew v. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 10:59 am by Margaret Wood
United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001), Justice Scalia applied the rule first formulated in Katz v. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 12:14 pm by Tom Goldstein
Quarles (decided six to three); and Ellis v. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 8:07 pm
) [1] Maulvi Tamizuddin Khan v Federation of Pakistan and ors 1954 SHC 81. [2] See e.g. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 7:00 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Redbox Disney Not Liable For Disclosing Device IDs And Viewing Habits App Users Aren’t “Subscribers” Under the VPPA–Ellis v. [read post]
3 Jan 2016, 1:56 pm by Giles Peaker
On disability discrimination: i) This was an issue of an ongoing act, not just the date of the issue of proceedings, it being “incumbent on the lender to consider the appropriateness of proceedings at every stage”. in R (JL) v Secretary of State for Defence [2013] EWCA Civ 449 the Court of Appeal confirmed that it is open to a Defendant to raise issues of human rights even at the stage of enforcement. [read post]
23 Dec 2015, 4:11 am by SHG
Garcia, Esq., attorney in private practice (Kirkland & Ellis LLP); Hon. [read post]
20 Dec 2015, 6:23 am by SHG
Posner’s argument — that there are “countless” exceptions to the First Amendment and it’s perfectly natural to make more — is exactly the government’s we-should-have-power-to-censor argument that the Supreme Court flatly rejected in United States v. [read post]