Search for: "Matter of Cert. of a Question of Law"
Results 581 - 600
of 1,628
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Oct 2017, 8:28 am
The government has opposed granting cert in all of them. [read post]
3 Oct 2017, 6:00 am
With the Supreme Court’s grant of cert in Oil States Energy Services v. [read post]
28 Sep 2017, 6:22 am
Indeed, the three cases constitute the first matter the Court will take up that day. [read post]
28 Sep 2017, 6:22 am
Indeed, the three cases constitute the first matter the Court will take up that day. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 3:32 pm
(Pls.' Renewed Mot. for Class Cert., App. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 7:56 am
That is the question before the justices next week; their answer could have a significant impact on how and whether employer-employee disputes are resolved in the future. [read post]
22 Sep 2017, 4:00 am
” The Cert. [read post]
21 Sep 2017, 1:01 pm
Benjamin Wittes posted the reply brief filed on cert in Bahlul vs. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 5:45 am
(pp. 25-26) Judgment of the trial court is REVERSED and the indictment is REINSTATED and the matter is REMANDED to the Law Division. [read post]
9 Sep 2017, 4:35 am
Kahn posted the Justice Department’s brief opposing the cert petition in Bahlul v. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 6:30 am
That, of course, leads to the big question—will the Court grant cert? [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 1:17 pm
Patent eligibility is a question of law. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 2:32 pm
NCAA--namely, as what he calls a federal "preemption" case that can be resolved by ignoring New Jersey law and simply recognizing that the sports gambling in question is prohibited by federal law. [read post]
31 Jul 2017, 7:30 am
Circuit (and everywhere else, for that matter). [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:32 pm
, 810 F.3d 476, 480-81 (7th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. [read post]
24 Jul 2017, 8:54 am
Patent eligibility is a question of law. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 12:01 pm
He filed an amicus brief in support of the government’s cert petition in Trump v. [read post]
8 Jul 2017, 8:25 am
We now analyze the State's overbreadth argument.Ex parte Maddison, supra.The court went on to outline the “applicable law” implicated by Maddison’s first argument:`Whether a statute is facially constitutional is a question of law that we review de novo. [read post]
7 Jul 2017, 7:14 am
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians: Coachella Cert Petition Question presented: Whether, when, and to what extent the federal reserved right doctrine recognized in Winters v. [read post]
6 Jul 2017, 6:07 pm
The Supreme Court closed out a rather anti-climactic term, employment law-wise, in June. [read post]
