Search for: "ENGLISH v. STATE"
Results 3981 - 4000
of 7,358
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jun 2014, 7:05 am
D’Amico Dry Ltd. v. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 12:05 am
Saturday: Johnson: Reflections on United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 7:40 am
But NLRB v. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 6:59 am
Following Advocate General Sharpston’s opinion, the Court stated that the InfoSoc Directive, which confers a more generous protection to TPMs than the Software Directive, should govern TPMs used in videogames. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 4:14 pm
In Mayo Collaborative Services v. [read post]
18 Jun 2014, 5:08 pm
The English equivalent is Regulations 17, 18, and 19 of the E-Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002. [read post]
18 Jun 2014, 5:15 am
Over Google’s objections, in Equustek Solutions Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2014, 5:15 am
Over Google’s objections, in Equustek Solutions Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 12:38 pm
White v. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 9:05 am
Orin Kerr writes in the Volokh Conspiracy about the Eleventh Circuit’s decision yesterday in United States v. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 11:43 am
Authors Guild, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 7:44 pm
As Judge Hacon put it: "In other words, 'the courts of the Member States' in Arts 2, 5, 6 and 'a Court of a Member State' in Article 24 of the Regulation encompass any tribunal of the relevant Member State, or tribunal of a place within the Member State as the case may be, which may lawfully hear the proceedings. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 6:03 am
We have another appellate court case that emphasizes that point quiet well in Stratford v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 5:44 am
An “English-only rule”, which requires employees to speak only English on the job, is only allowed if it is needed to ensure the safe or efficient operation of the employer’s business and is put in place for nondiscriminatory reasons.The EEOC has also stated that an "English only" rule may be justified by "business necessity. [read post]
6 Jun 2014, 7:00 am
In plain English, that means the policy of indefinite detention by the military, without charge or trial, could be carried out here at home. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 4:14 pm
The Cases One case was Lawyer v. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 9:14 am
Parents Involved in Community Schools v. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 12:39 pm
But the notion that democracy would be advanced – saved, “restored” – by limiting speech is nothing but a perversion of the English language. [read post]
