Search for: "Deter v. Deter"
Results 4221 - 4240
of 5,291
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jul 2010, 12:44 pm
As Judge Levin pointed in Morefield v. [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 2:02 pm
I had turned down the case when White first came to me, because I myself had already won the infringement issue in Michigan in Taubman v. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 10:56 am
See Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 8:59 am
Co. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 3:07 am
An inhibition from broadcasting shouted abuse which expresses no content does not inhibit, and should not deter, heated and even offensive dialogue which retains a degree of relevant content. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 5:48 pm
., Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 12:56 pm
(Eugene Volokh) The case is Dorr v. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 7:00 am
The same exclusion applies to to “any whistleblower who is, or was at the time the whistleblower acquired the original information submitted to the Commission, a member, officer, or employee of (i) an appropriate regulatory agency; (ii) the Department of Justice; (iii) a self-regulatory organization; (iv) the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board; or (v) a law enforcement organization. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 6:53 am
In Herring v. [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 12:10 pm
(The case, U.S. v. [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 9:57 am
This language is intended to deter and penalize indirect retaliation by, for example, firing a spouse or child of the person who blew the whistle. [read post]
6 Jul 2010, 9:29 am
I suspect, for instance, that the ban on even very low poll taxes as to the right to vote — to the extent that the ban stems less from application of strict scrutiny in Harper v. [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 5:41 pm
THE COURT SHALL DETERMINE THE GUIDELINE AMOUNT OF TEMPORARY MAINTE- 19 NANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS PARAGRAPH AFTER DETER- 20 MINING THE INCOME OF THE PARTIES: 21 (1) WHERE THE PAYOR’S INCOME IS UP TO AND INCLUDING THE INCOME CAP: 22 (A) THE COURT SHALL SUBTRACT TWENTY PERCENT OF THE INCOME OF THE PAYEE 23 FROM THIRTY PERCENT OF THE INCOME UP TO THE INCOME CAP OF THE PAYOR. 24 (B) THE COURT SHALL THEN MULTIPLY THE SUM OF THE PAYOR’S INCOME UP TO… [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 10:57 am
* Jiron v. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 12:22 pm
I blogged about one possible problem with it a few months ago; today I saw another decision, Torraco v. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 3:00 am
(West 1990); contra White v. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 3:01 pm
The contrasting markings therefore did not contribute to the solution of any technical problem by providing a technical effect and hence had no significance when assessing inventive step (Summary of facts and submissions, points V and VII). [4.2.2] The present board is aware of the difficulty of assessing whether or not a feature contributes to the technical character of a claim. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 2:07 am
In Schmitz v. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 1:47 pm
To illustrate this point, the Court in Centre County recently issued a holding in the case of Allen v. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 2:51 pm
Wouldn’t there be a U.S. interest in deterring such fraud, reducing private enforcement costs within the United States? [read post]
