Search for: "U.S. v. Black*"
Results 21 - 40
of 7,649
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 May 2024, 3:52 pm
For scholarly publications, Rule 10.7.1(d) adds a descriptive parenthetical note for citing cases where an enslaved person was involved, and provides examples like “Wall v. [read post]
28 May 2024, 9:05 pm
The U.S. [read post]
27 May 2024, 4:00 am
U.S. decided. [read post]
23 May 2024, 6:03 pm
Johnson and Shaw v. [read post]
22 May 2024, 4:00 am
Here is how Politico described this terrible inclusion:When U.S. [read post]
21 May 2024, 8:17 am
Illegal reentry statute was not enacted with a discriminatory purpose and does not violate Equal Protection U.S. v. [read post]
20 May 2024, 8:05 pm
The Ninth Circuit, in U.S. v. [read post]
20 May 2024, 8:40 am
By contrast, Paul-Emile’s theory might suggest a revisionist reading of Gonzales v. [read post]
20 May 2024, 5:00 am
In the wake of the announced boycott against Columbia University, I posed several questions to Judge Matthew Solomson of the U.S. [read post]
19 May 2024, 9:05 pm
Feb 14, 2023 | Back to the Future of U.S. [read post]
17 May 2024, 1:07 pm
This week the Tenth Circuit vacates that opinion and requests supplemental briefing on how the Supreme Court's recent decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 1:19 pm
Atonio, 490 U.S. 642, 652-53 (1989), quoting Albemarle Paper Co. v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 7:41 am
Smith Corp., 521 U.S. 179, 191 (1997), citing Connors v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 4:00 am
5/15/2000: U.S. v. [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am
Maggs (U.S. [read post]
13 May 2024, 1:59 pm
In Holder v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 4:50 am
” In the case law, there is something of a presumption in favor of intervention: “Whether intervention is sought as a matter of right under CPLR 1012 (a), or as a matter of discretion under CPLR 1013, is of little practical significance since a timely motion for leave to intervene should be granted, in either event, where the intervenor has a real and substantial interest in the outcome of the proceedings” (Maggi v U.S. [read post]
11 May 2024, 4:00 am
U.S. (1943). [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:30 pm
H/t Michael Banerjee The U.S. [read post]
10 May 2024, 5:10 am
In Pliva, Inc. v Mensing (564 U.S. 604 [2011]), the Supreme Court found that these plaintiffs’ state-law claims against generic manufacturers were preempted by federal law under the Supremacy Clause to the extent that state-law failure-to-warn statutes required generic drugs to provide more stringent, safer warning labels. [read post]
