Search for: "Russell v. Place"
Results 341 - 360
of 826
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jan 2011, 1:04 pm
Place. [read post]
30 May 2017, 10:33 pm
|Fordham 25|Unwired Planet v Huawei: Is FRAND now a competition law free zone? [read post]
21 Mar 2018, 3:55 am
Mansky, which asks whether a Minnesota law banning political apparel at polling places is facially overbroad under the First Amendment. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 4:09 am
Justice Sonia Sotomayor would have dismissed the case as improvidently granted, leaving the ruling of the lower court in place. [read post]
17 Aug 2020, 11:58 am
Tom Goldstein, the publisher of SCOTUSblog and partner at Goldstein & Russell, P.C., has argued more than 40 cases before the Supreme Court since his first oral argument in 1999. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 4:07 am
The first two cases, Bostock v. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:31 pm
Cain, eds. 2006) The Supreme Court and Election Law: A Reply to Three Commentators, 31 Journal of Legislation 1 (2004) Looking for Standards (in all the Wrong Places): Partisan Gerrymandering Claims After Vieth, 3 Election Law Journal 626 (2004) (draft available) The California Recall Punch Card Litigation: Why Bush v. [read post]
18 Sep 2018, 5:47 am
However in the old Queen’s Bench case of Russel v. [read post]
17 May 2020, 10:18 am
The court only steps in if parents propose something blatantly unreasonable such as “hand-offs of the children will be at 2 AM” If the two parents cannot agree on a parenting schedule “[t]he court shall allocate parenting time according to the child’s best interests”740 ILCS 5/602.7(a) When allocating parenting time the court shall deem that “[i]t is presumed both parents are fit and the court shall not place any restrictions on parenting time. [read post]
7 Sep 2016, 7:52 am
[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel to the respondents in Comcast v. [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 2:13 am
On 20 to 22 March 2024, a three-day hearing took place before Fancourt J in the High Court to determine whether the claimants in the NGN unlawful information gathering case would be granted permission to amend their claim. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 5:49 am
After Frank Russell McCoy was convicted, in a bench trial, of “one count of Transportation of Obscene Matters in violation of 18 U.S. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 10:05 am
Russell, 09-781); a test of whether the transcript of a pre-trial interview with the prosecution’s key witness in a criminal case is the kind of evidence that must be shared with defense lawyers (Banks v. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 4:02 am
Forest Service v. [read post]
3 Aug 2014, 11:34 am
ASTEBERG f/k/a JACQUELYN RUSSELL, Petitioner, v. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 6:07 am
Other coverage of and commentary on the Court focus on arguments that took place earlier this week. [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 11:57 am
In macabre detail, the Eighth Circuit issued a March 6, 2018 decision in Bucklew v. [read post]
9 Sep 2022, 2:24 pm
Fair v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 9:05 am
Hellerstedt to invalidate parts of a Texas law that imposed stringent requirements on physicians who performed abortions and on clinics where those procedures took place; and most recently, in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. [read post]
29 Oct 2022, 7:56 am
” People v. [read post]
