Search for: "Dean v. United States" Results 381 - 400 of 1,457
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Apr 2007, 9:00 am
            Last February, the United States Supreme Court added another layer to its punitive damages jurisprudence in Philip Morris USA v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 9:01 pm by John Dean
And much Internet traffic between two foreign countries often passes through the United States. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 1:06 pm by Diane Marie Amann
As an amicus, the United States argued that such intent might be implicit in the bilateral investment treaty at issue. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 12:29 pm by Kevin Johnson
Johnson,  Dean of the UC Davis School of Law and Mabie-Apallas Professor of Public Interest Law and Chicana/o Studies. [read post]
28 Jun 2014, 6:00 am
Herbalife issued the following statement: Today's decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the FTC v. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 7:22 am by Frank Pasquale
(Review of Ian Bremmer, The End of the Free Market: Who Wins the War Between States and Corporations? [read post]
19 May 2008, 7:09 am
  The decision came on a 7-2 vote in United States v. [read post]
12 Aug 2022, 5:55 am by Nicholas Rasmussen
Five years ago today, white supremacist extremists from across the United States traveled to Charlottesville, Virginia for the “Unite the Right” rally. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 9:00 pm by Vikram David Amar and Jason Mazzone
National attention has recently been directed to the boisterous protest by Stanford Law School (SLS) students at a Federalist Society Event featuring Judge Kyle Duncan, a conservative Trump-appointed judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. [read post]
10 Oct 2007, 10:59 pm
State, 701 So.2d 76 (Fla. 1997) and Buenoano v. [read post]
21 Jun 2007, 2:36 pm
United States, when it held: "When a fragmented Court decides a case and no single rationale explaining the result enjoys the assent of five Justices, 'the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those Members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds.'" In United States v. [read post]