Search for: "Victory v. State" Results 5361 - 5380 of 6,924
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Aug 2010, 6:14 am by John Culhane
(There’s a compelling argument for affording the GLBT community more protection under the law, and the great, mostly overlooked accomplishment of the recent CLS v. [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 10:00 pm by Leland E. Beck
  The Wall Street Journal opined that this victory for Texas illustrates EPA overreaching in seeking to transfer power from the states to the federal government, even if Congress intended otherwise. [read post]
13 Apr 2007, 8:43 am
The Court held in United States v. [read post]
26 Jan 2008, 5:45 am
The latest broadside fired at the guideline edifice comes in a great dissent by Judge Noonan in United States v. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 2:49 pm by Bill Otis
 The answer is no, for reasons explained by Justice Alito in his four-member dissent in Kennedy v. [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 1:53 pm by Lindsey Williams
”I quote that final line because of a December 15, 2011 Court of Appeals decision from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, styled “DeGuelle v. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 12:37 pm
The attorneys Insler & Hermann and Turley, Redmond, Rosasco & Rosasco are proud of our many federal court case victories, including the important Second Circuit seizure disorder case of Brown v. [read post]
21 Aug 2008, 10:06 pm
See Also: MPAA Waffling On Piracy Costs; RIAA says Illicit CDs Worth $13.74 Each File Sharer Settles With RIAA for a Whopping $756 a Song Judge Hints at Mistrial in RIAA v. [read post]
17 Nov 2019, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
United States In South Carolina the case of Charleston City Paper has confirmed libel law principles, Blog Law Online comments. [read post]
30 Jul 2017, 9:30 pm by Daniel Tokaji
Virginia State Board of Elections and Cooper v. [read post]
26 Dec 2021, 1:23 am by Joe Mullin
We won a victory in July, when a federal court blocked the law from going into effect. [read post]
15 Apr 2020, 1:25 am by Eleonora Rosati
This means that Member States might (though they are not obliged to) “address that dynamic concern by granting rightholders ‘rights to receive fuller information’. [read post]