Search for: "Day v. Texas"
Results 5361 - 5380
of 7,591
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Mar 2012, 4:21 pm
The University of Texas Law School is hosting a two-day conference on "Countermajoritarianism and the Court" tomorrow and Saturday, sparked in part by an article in the recent Supreme Court Review by Rick Pildes suggesting that the "countermajoritarian difficulty" is alive and well, as witnessed most prominently in Citizens United, opposed by roughly 80% of the public. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 2:24 pm
And the Supreme Court’s decision (by granting cert to Fisher v. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 11:18 am
The style of the case is William Norris v. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 9:52 am
Mukasey, Diallo v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 5:59 pm
Courts may be skeptical about FTC positions—case on debt collection down in Texas where the judge looked at deceptiveness differently than the FTC did, and doesn’t necessarily give deference. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 4:56 pm
Supreme Court to hear Fisher v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 7:38 am
Justice Alito delivered the day’s first opinion in FAA v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 4:28 am
Ass’n v. [read post]
28 Mar 2012, 3:43 am
(See the transcript here.)Laurin describes Connick v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 6:42 pm
Morrow v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 12:03 pm
, Kumho Tire Co. v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 11:13 am
Parker, a Texas case that enjoined a jazz club in San Antonio in the early 1920s, and Morison v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 6:49 am
The style of the case is Raymundo Salcedo v. [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 6:52 am
US-based lawyer Stephen J Easley recently reported on a session at the South by Southwest Interactive Festival panel in Texas, “Can You Tweet That? [read post]
25 Mar 2012, 8:46 pm
” Brief of Petitioner at 19, Al Bahlul v. [read post]
24 Mar 2012, 9:55 am
In State v. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 1:29 pm
Texas Roadhouse Holdings, LLC, 2011 WL 7560647 (Mag. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 4:24 pm
The Act provided that a class action could not be maintained unless the purported violation was either (1) an act or practice declared to be deceptive or unconscionable by a rule adopted by the Attorney General before the consumer transaction on which the action was based or (2) an act or practice determined by an Ohio state court to violate the Act and committed after the decision had been made public.The purchaser could not pursue a claim under the Ohio Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act… [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 1:31 pm
In Brainard v. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 4:22 am
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Connick v. [read post]
