Search for: "In Re: v. In Re:" Results 361 - 380 of 62,724
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Nov 2014, 12:31 pm by Media Law Prof
Cass, Center for the Rule of Law, Cass & Associates, PC; Boston University School of Law, is publishing Weighing Constitutional Anchors: New York Times Co. v. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 12:58 pm by Austin Campbell
Dallas Employment Trial Lawyer Austin Campbell Summary: This article explores one aspect of the recent case Harris v. [read post]
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC v Renewable Fuels Association, a case regarding exemptions for small refineries from the Renewable Fuel Standards Program, and United States v Palomar-Santiago, which involves immigration law and noncitizen re-entry. [read post]
The EU Commission’s rejection of the Hairdressers’ Agreement as well as the decision in European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) and Jan Willem Goudriaan v European Commission, Case T–310/18, 24 October 2019 come to mind. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 6:39 am by John Elwood
Judge, 10-367, and Quinn v. [read post]
27 May 2011, 2:54 am by Madeline Reardon, 1 Kings Bench Walk.
This week the Supreme Court has been hearing an appeal from the Court of Appeal in Re E (Children.) [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 1:30 pm
There are a number of steel plate antidumping orders in effect:certain hot-rolled carbon steel plate and high-strength low-alloy plate originating in or exported from the People's Republic of China (Plate III);certain hot-rolled carbon steel plate and high-strength low-alloy steel plate originating in or exported from the Republic of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania (Plate V); andcertain carbon steel plate and high strength low alloy steel plate originating in or exported from… [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 9:47 am by The Legal Blog
The doctrine of Res Judicata has been evolved to prevent such an anarchy. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 5:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
According to Chief Judge Jacobs' dissenting opinion, the split is with the Ninth Circuit's opinion in Coneff v. [read post]