Search for: "State v. Quick" Results 4341 - 4360 of 4,835
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 May 2013, 9:22 am by Benjamin Jackson
One of the central policy issues injected into the current case of AMP v. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 10:26 am by Neil H. Buchanan
  During an oral argument at the Supreme Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch initiated this bizarre exchange, as reported in Slate:During oral arguments in 303 Creative v. [read post]
1 Nov 2024, 6:07 am by Sean Murphy
The merits of this issue were not resolved by the Supreme Court’s 1979 decision in Goldwater v. [read post]
23 Jan 2010, 5:46 pm by Erik Gerding
Google v China: Do we know corporate social responsibility when we see it? [read post]
13 May 2012, 8:20 am
Last Thursday, after seven years of coursing through various boards of appeals and courts in Europe, the Court of Justice for the European Union (CJEU) held in their robust judgment in Rubinstein and L'Oreal v OHIM (Case C-100/11) that the General Court did not err in law in concluding that L'Oreal's mark for BOTOCYL and Helena Rubinstein's mark for BOTOLIST took advantage of the distinctive character and reputation of… [read post]
23 Jul 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
FTC Chair Lina Khan previewed this in June, stating that “The word ‘efficiency’ doesn’t appear anywhere in the antitrust statutes. [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 3:41 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
” The Onion also has paid content: Woman Going to Take Quick Break After Filling Out Name, Address on Tax Forms: small “sponsored,” actually for H&R Block. [read post]
17 May 2016, 7:33 am by Marty Lederman
 When that much becomes clear on remand, it ought to facilitate a quick resolution of those cases. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am by admin
Initially, post-Daubert, federal courts were quick to excuse the absence of epidemiology for a novel claim. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 12:00 am by George M. Wallace
Supreme Court in the affirmative action case of United Steelworkers of America v. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 5:37 am by 1 Crown Office Row
McB. v L.E. 5 October [2010] ECR I-nyr at paragraph 53 the Third Section of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU) interpreted ed this provision of the Charter as meaning that where Charter rights paralleled ECHR rights the CJEU should follow any clear and constant jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. [read post]