Search for: "State of Maryland v. United States" Results 381 - 400 of 3,223
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 May 2011, 4:55 pm
Argument was held on May 10, 2011 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Liberty University, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jan 2007, 6:20 pm
The case itself notes:Classen owns the following United States Patent Numbers: (1) 6,420,139 ("the 139 patent"); (2) 6,638,739 ("the 739 patent"); (3) 5,728,385 ("the 385 patent "); and (4) 5,723,283 ("the 283 patent") (collectively, "the patents in suit"). [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 2:05 am
United States, 880 F.2d 84, 86-87 (8th Cir. 1989).Kansas: Savina v. [read post]
9 Jun 2013, 1:55 pm
Privacy rights were outweighed by law enforcement interests in the United States Supreme Court's June 3rd ruling in Maryland v. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 5:55 pm by Nate Cardozo
Kidane in order to protect the safety and well-being of his family both in the United States and in Ethiopia. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 8:12 am
BredarHolding:  The United States District Court for the District of Maryland (1) granted a motion for partial reconsideration to modify an interlocutory judgment and (2) denied motion for summary judgment due to genuine disputes of fact surrounding a claim for lack of good faith.Facts:  Defendant (“Manufacturer”) ran a business with several buildings covered by a commercial insurance policy maintained by Plaintiff (“Insurer”). [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 11:19 am
This year, the Court of Appeals of Maryland will hear Kelly v. [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 11:19 am
This year, the Court of Appeals of Maryland will hear Kelly v. [read post]
4 May 2009, 8:28 am
Maryland has amended its antitrust law to make resale price maintenance agreements per se illegal, thus overruling Leegin Creative Leather Products v. [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 4:27 am by Lawrence Solum
Maryland, that nationally chartered banks are federal instrumentalities entitled to regulate themselves free from state law, even when national law fails to address the risks that state law seeks to regulate. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 10:21 am
That stance is at odds with the US Supreme Court decision in United States v Jones (January 23, 2012), about which I posted yesterday. [read post]
4 Nov 2008, 2:56 pm
In fact the answer is that the police may not stop a person based on an anonymous tip in any state in the country because the law on this issue comes from a Supreme Court of the United States decision, as opposed to a state appellate court decision, and thus applies to all of the states. [read post]