Search for: "Johns v. State" Results 4821 - 4840 of 22,321
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Oct 2009, 4:26 pm
Mental Illness as a Bar to the Death Penalty There is already precedent from the United States Supreme Court (Ford v. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 3:32 pm by William Baude
Tomorrow the Court will hear arguments in Armstrong v. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 1:29 pm by Jess Bravin
At Tuesday’s Supreme Court arguments, Washington litigator Peter Keisler, acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal and Chief Justice John Roberts all sang the same tune when it came to global warming—state governments, they seemed to agree, had no right to sue out-of-state polluters over greenhouse gas emissions. [read post]
23 Oct 2008, 10:11 am
The Court noted that the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit considered the question in United States v. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 7:50 am
 But while the Costco suit was under way, the Supreme Court held in 2013, in Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons, that the first sale doctrine also applies to copies of protected works lawfully manufactured abroad. [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 4:11 am by Mark Tabakman
  The point, as John Ho stated, is that every employer must examine its relationship with other affiliated entities, as well as temporary staffing agencies that it may work with. [read post]
7 Aug 2014, 1:31 pm by Ron Coleman
We all know that the CAFC in In re Bose Corporation jettisoned the TTAB’s “knew or should have known” standard for fraud set out in Medinol v. [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 12:35 pm by David Oscar Markus
"[I]n determining whether reforms are needed, and especially in determining whether the existing guideline should be burdened with even more adjustments, the Commission should examine whether our system already provides an adequate solution for the claimed 'unacceptable' outcomes the Department complains about," Gleeson wrote in United States v. [read post]
30 Jun 2021, 6:25 pm by Mark Latham
ShareThe Supreme Court held 5-4 in PennEast Pipeline Co. v. [read post]