Search for: "Smith v. State" Results 4981 - 5000 of 11,002
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Mar 2015, 6:23 am by Matthew R. Arnold, Esq.
Arnold is admitted to practice in all state courts in North Carolina, in the United States Federal Court for the Western District of North Carolina, in the North Carolina Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, and in the Fourth Circuit United States Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 5:32 am by Charles Sartain
Smith and less than the lessee argued for. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 3:59 pm by Giles Peaker
Hardy, R (on the application of) v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [2015] EWHC 890 Oh, we have been waiting for this one. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 11:11 am
  * Impulse trade mark registration: no sweat, as AG gives his viewJeremy reports on the Opinion of Advocate General Wahl in Case C‑125/14 Iron & Smith Kft v Unilever NV, a request for a preliminary ruling by the CJEU from the Budapest Municipal Court. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 10:57 am
Smith (1990) (rejecting strict scrutiny of neutral laws that burden religion), but the increased litigation pressure and focus of anti-gay activists may lead courts–especially elected state court judges–in many places to break the dam. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 2:46 am
There was still no infringement or passing off so far as SCRABBLE v SCRAMBLE was concerned, however. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 10:16 am
  Here are the latest four InFuse victories.Truthful v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 1:56 pm by Lyle Denniston
EPA and Utility Air Regulatory Group v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 12:44 pm
The Opinion of Advocate General Wahl was published today in Case C‑125/14 Iron & Smith Kft v Unilever NV, a request for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) from the Hungarian Fővárosi Törvényszék -- that's the Budapest Municipal Court, if you didn't know ["I knew that", said Merpel ...]. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 11:45 am by Matthew R. Arnold, Esq.
The United States Supreme Court actually rejected the notion that the Federal Government can require an individual to purchase health insurance in a now-famous 2012 decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts in National Federation of Independent Business et al. v. [read post]