Search for: "Cable v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,804
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jun 2019, 7:22 am
Rosenberger v. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 1:42 pm
Because of this, the partial dissent stated, the certification order should have been vacated to the extent that it provided for a single class as to proof of damages and remanded to the lower court to consider whether the class could be divided into subclasses for the purpose of proving damages.The decision in Behrend v. [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 4:38 pm
Dep’t of State (D.D.C.) -- ruling that State Department performed adequate search for a directive issued to de facto Embassy of the United States in Taiwan and properly withheld cables pursuant to Exemption 1. [read post]
23 Nov 2010, 4:03 am
State v. [read post]
16 Jun 2011, 10:14 am
Brantley v. [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 1:18 pm
Last month, in Service One Cable T.V., Inc. v. [read post]
20 Nov 2013, 8:58 am
Based on his own experience in the industry, the affiant stated that Tucker’s services were considered to be retail functions. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 12:04 am
In Oregon Cable Telecommunications Association v. [read post]
12 Aug 2010, 9:38 am
Cable v. [read post]
31 Oct 2014, 9:16 am
In ABC v. [read post]
26 Oct 2018, 2:00 am
The case, Manhattan Community Access Corp v Halleck, involves whether private operators of public access channels are state actors subject to constitutional liability under the First Amendment. [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 9:00 pm
On Friday 14 November, Mr Justice Arnold delivered his judgment in Armour Group Plc v Leisuretech Electronics Pty Ltd [2008] EWHC 2797 (now available from BAILII here). [read post]
10 Aug 2007, 9:58 am
Time Warner Cable, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 6:14 am
New York City (the City) secured a property interest in public-access television channels when it granted a cable franchise to a cable company. [read post]
25 Jul 2009, 8:12 am
Consequently, Time Warner Cable, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Sep 2012, 9:10 pm
State of Bihar (2009) 7 SCC 673, Rampur Fertilizers Limited v. [read post]
8 Jan 2021, 10:30 am
Alphabet LinkedIn Isn’t a State Actor–Perez v. [read post]
18 Dec 2010, 11:50 am
And these posts may be of interest to you… Joe Biden v. [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 6:00 am
Pool Offshore, Inc., 182 F.2d 353 (5th Cir. 1999) was still good law in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Stewart v. [read post]
25 May 2023, 5:15 am
” Preservation of Wainscott, Inc. v New York State Public Service Commission, 2023 NY Slip Op 02510 (2d Dept. 5/10/23). [read post]
