Search for: "US v. Brown" Results 461 - 480 of 7,294
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jun 2011, 1:15 pm
However after that ruling was over turned in the 1954 ruling of Brown v. [read post]
11 May 2009, 1:54 pm
He also says that "The public, the legal academy, our colleagues on other courts, and appointing authorities have a right to judge us based on our performance on the bench," and goes on to say: "In this case, in particular, I believe that public disclosure is important. [read post]
23 Feb 2023, 10:29 am by Harbir Deol
The post US Supreme Court Reaffirms That Being Highly Paid Does Not Make an Employee ‘Exempt’ appeared first on Brown Rudnick. [read post]
8 Feb 2011, 2:15 am by INFORRM
  The “Times” contends that the decision of the Court of Appeal is conflict with Reynolds, Jameel, In re BBC, Re Guardian News and Media, Galloway v Telegraph Group and Browne v Associated Newspapers and that it “represents a retrograde and impermissible departure from the principles that now govern cases such as the present. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
Clare Brown, Library and Information Manager, is a member of the Cyber Investigation Unit at Collyer Bristow LLP. [read post]
12 Sep 2017, 3:20 am by Scott Bomboy
On September 12, 1958, a unanimous Supreme Court declined a Little Rock School District request to delay desegregation mandated by the Court’s Brown v. [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 1:54 pm by Luke Rioux
S. 304, 315 (1900).)Later in the paragraph, the court quotes this really scary language from Brown v. [read post]
24 Oct 2009, 3:25 pm
Cassens Transport Co., et al., Petitioners v,  Paul Brown, et al.,  No. 08-1375. [read post]
Just over a month ago, employers throughout the United States breathed a sigh of relief after Judge Ada Brown in the Northern District of Texas issued a summary judgment ruling in the Ryan v. [read post]
14 Aug 2007, 4:12 pm
That would take us back to the dispute over the legitimacy of Brown v. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 1:36 am by war
Anita Brown, over at IPanz, reports on Cowdroy J’s exercise of discretion to leave the Wild Geese trade mark for whiskey on the Registrar, even though non-use throughout the relevant statutory period was proved, on the basis of the perceived risk of public confusion. [read post]