Search for: "Andrews v. State " Results 461 - 480 of 5,381
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Mar 2023, 2:57 pm by Quinta Jurecic, Benjamin Wittes
The latter prong of the investigation led to the Supreme Court case Trump v. [read post]
The most famous decision might be the UK Supreme Court’s Ruling in Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd, which was reported on this blog here. [read post]
28 Mar 2023, 1:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
Taney supported Andrew Jackson in the 1824 presidential election and the 1828 presidential election. [read post]
On 16 March 2022, the High Court of England and Wales handed down its judgment following the FRAND trial in InterDigital v Lenovo. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 8:18 am by Nicholas Round (Bristows)
On 16 March 2023, the High Court of England and Wales handed down its judgment following the FRAND trial in InterDigital v Lenovo. [read post]
24 Mar 2023, 3:00 am by Jeff Welty
Last week marked the 60th anniversary of Gideon v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 5:58 am by madeo-design
While there, she gained fame for “saving” Major League Baseball with her strike-ending decision in Silverman v. [read post]
15 Mar 2023, 2:49 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Digging deeper, however, reveals that the private sector and state and local municipalities fared better in FY 2022, as the Commission actually secured less monetary relief in total and per capita as compared to the prior year: $342 million for 33,298 employees in FY 2022 v. $350.7 million for 11,067 employees in FY 2021. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 2:13 am by INFORRM
” 26 civil society groups, including Privacy International and Open Rights Group signed an open letter to Secretary of State, Michelle Donelan, stating that the “ill-considered proposals…endanger UK residents and UK data protection. [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 11:47 am by Reference Staff
”The most recent adoption of a Restatement section by the Washington Supreme Court was in Gerlach v. [read post]
7 Mar 2023, 7:14 am by Alan J. Arville
However, such prescribing activities would be limited under the new rules to non-narcotic Schedule III-V controlled substances, a limitation not expressly included in the special registration provisions of the Ryan Haight Act. [read post]