Search for: "Short v. Davis " Results 21 - 40 of 962
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jan 2024, 12:05 am by Frank Cranmer
(L&RUK Health Warning: Mandy Rice-Davies Applies.) [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm by Josh Blackman
Here the article invoked the same reasoning used by Chief Justice Marshall in United States v. [read post]
28 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm by Noah Brown
Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. [read post]
8 Dec 2023, 7:54 am by Josh Blackman
On December 6, the Colorado Supreme Court heard oral argument in Griswold v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 3:06 pm by Aaron Moss
Oh Mickey, you’re so fine—but you’re not alone: An avalanche of copyrighted works will enter the public domain in the United States on January 1, 2024. [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
. ― The changes eliminate elements of the 2019 Nonbank Designation Guidance that incorporated and addressed certain holdings of the MetLife v. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 11:15 am by Unknown
Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) [preprint]- Chapter 15: Commentary on Department of Homeland Security v. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
On 25 August 2023, the Court of Appeal Nicola Davies, Arnold and Warby LJJ) handed down judgment in Blake & ors v Fox [2023] EWCA Civ 1000. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 6:30 am by ernst
This case also implicated Section 3: the treason indictment against Jefferson Davis. [read post]
11 Sep 2023, 10:24 pm by Josh Blackman
Part V considers another threshold question: was Trump ever subject to Section 3? [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
During my recent visit to Columbia Law School, Professor John Coffee shared with me a draft of a short article that later appeared in the New York Law Journal.[1] Coffee’s article assessed the prospects in the U.S. [read post]
29 Aug 2023, 11:20 am by Giles Peaker
In Avon Ground Rents Ltd v Cowley (2019) EWCA Civ 1827, to which Mr Morris also referred, Nicola Davies LJ approved, at (31), this Tribunal’s conclusion in the same case that “whether an amount is reasonable as a payment in advance is not generally to be determined by the application of rigid rules but must be assessed in the light of the specific facts of the case”. [read post]