Search for: "US v. Brown"
Results 381 - 400
of 8,074
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 May 2007, 10:08 am
Jay Brown has an interesting post on the (likely) pivotal position of Justice Alito in the outcome. [read post]
21 Apr 2022, 12:16 pm
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and Brown v. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 8:59 am
See, e.g., State v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 7:07 pm
[In Brown v. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 11:17 am
v. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 11:30 am
Giles v. [read post]
6 Oct 2009, 3:37 pm
Newman, Raiz and Shelmadine, LLC v. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 7:19 am
Fallon v. [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 1:23 pm
The recent 2nd Circuit opinion in Kelly-Brown v. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 9:58 am
(Plaintiff’s Opposition at 21 (citing Brown v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 4:49 am
If Brown had abandoned the mark then Newton had priority, since his actual use preceded the intent-to-use application filing date. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 6:02 am
Jones v. [read post]
20 Aug 2014, 8:32 am
See, e.g., State v. [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 8:12 am
Read the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision at: Sipsas v. 1299781 Ontario Inc. [read post]
18 Oct 2007, 9:51 pm
Brown v. [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 6:01 am
Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. [read post]
9 May 2019, 1:44 pm
Ciggs Lerner v. 180 Properties LLC In re K.C. [read post]
4 Nov 2016, 11:32 am
But he argues that his complaint was improperly dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6), and ignores the fact that the district court (wrongly) used Rule 42(b).Defendants make that point in their opposition brief on appeal, and argue the Rule 42(b) issue on the merits. [read post]
3 Nov 2016, 5:42 pm
Comment The case is a useful reminder to prospective NPO applicants of the importance of satisfying both limbs of the test before an NPO will be granted and that, even if both tests are satisfied, the court may still refuse the application unless any public policy considerations can be overcome. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 6:00 pm
Just out from Oxford University Press is The Ghost of Jim Crow: How Southern Moderates Used Brown v. [read post]
