Search for: "STATE v KENNEDY"
Results 4961 - 4980
of 7,331
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Dec 2017, 2:43 am
United States and Overton v. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 9:59 am
See Perry v. [read post]
2 Apr 2013, 9:01 pm
In the 1996 case of Romer v. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 5:21 pm
Schreiner said the Court had “launched the United States Patent System into the Information Age with the Bilski v. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 9:55 am
Erickson and Washington v. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 9:25 am
Abbasi, writing for a six-justice court, Kennedy reversed a U.S. [read post]
25 Sep 2018, 7:06 pm
National Collegiate Athletic Association, a case that held that Congress, by prohibiting a state from partially repealing a state law, impermissibly commandeered the powers of the state; (4) Janus v. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 7:05 am
Lewis v. [read post]
31 Jul 2017, 6:04 am
United States v. [read post]
12 Aug 2024, 4:00 am
In Patchak v. [read post]
23 Sep 2020, 3:01 pm
County (2013) and NFIB v. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 11:37 am
In the closely-watched case of Bilski v. [read post]
1 Nov 2007, 7:29 pm
Kamins was the lead plaintiff in the case, Connection Distributing Co., et al. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2007, 12:21 am
Kamins was the lead plaintiff in the case, Connection Distributing Co., et al. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 1:36 pm
That denial of an independent expert, McWilliams’ attorney told the justices today, violated his client’s constitutional rights, established in a Supreme Court decision, Ake v. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 10:14 am
The name of the case is Paroline v. [read post]
10 Nov 2019, 4:00 am
While Justice Thomas has cast some doubt on this form of analysis in his opinion in Reed v. [read post]
21 Feb 2018, 8:43 am
My preview of City of Hays, Kansas v. [read post]
16 Apr 2018, 8:02 pm
The justices’ second argument this morning was WesternGeco v Ion Geophysical Corp., a case that requires the justices yet again to consider Section 271 of the Patent Act. [read post]
11 Jan 2013, 11:44 am
On Wednesday, the Court heard oral argument in Maracich v. [read post]
