Search for: "Battle v. United States" Results 581 - 600 of 3,852
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Aug 2011, 8:13 am by Stefanie Levine
  Judge Lourie states “[v]isualization does not cleave and isolate the particular DNA; that is the act of human invention. [read post]
30 Apr 2020, 4:05 am by Howard Friedman
In a dispute that has been litigated since 2004, a New York state trial court inAgudas Chasidei Chabad of the United States v. [read post]
1 Apr 2021, 8:00 am by Unknown
United States (FTCA; Tribal Police)Cherokee Nation v. [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 6:10 am
Forever 21, Inc.: Puma’s “Fenty” Slides May Not Have the Traction for the Uphill Battle Against Forever 21Jessica Cohen-NowakCommentary: Cartwheeling Through Copyright Law: Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 12:15 pm
This was both unfortunate, and odd, since the United States Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit had previously held just the opposite.. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 3:04 am by Peter Mahler
A Manhattan appellate panel’s decision last month in Akasa Holdings, LLC v Sweet, 2014 NY Slip Op 01822 [1st Dept Mar. 20, 2014], illustrates another kind of co-op shareholder dispute involving a battle for board control of a four-unit co-op, pitting one tenant-shareholder owning a majority of the voting shares against the other three tenant-shareholders. [read post]
4 Jun 2007, 11:02 pm
Name data are from Social Security card applications for births that occurred in the United States. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 11:59 am by Kevin Johnson
Arguing on behalf of the United States, Assistant to the Solicitor General Rachel Kovner seemed to make somewhat inconsistent arguments. [read post]
22 Apr 2016, 7:57 am by Amy Howe
Monday’s oral argument in United States v. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 5:57 am by Alan Morrison
In her majority opinion, Justice Elena Kagan held that administrative law judges are officers of the United States, not employees, and so they have to be appointed under the Constitution’s appointments clause. [read post]