Search for: "State v. Belt"
Results 581 - 600
of 1,160
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Oct 2014, 5:45 am
From Northrup v. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 8:43 pm
” Sotomayor went even further, suggesting that she thought that Lorenzo’s conduct was so plainly condemnable that Heim’s admissions regarding Lorenzo’s state of mind seemed to her to “give away your case. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 10:35 am
In a recent case, Bing v. [read post]
22 Jun 2023, 3:21 am
Tim Cushing does an excellent job of saying what needed to be said about the Third Circuit’s decision in Fenico v. [read post]
15 Nov 2019, 3:00 am
It stated as follows- "the applicant's handbags; vanity cases (not fitted), briefcases, articles of luggage, wallets, purses (not of precious metal or coated therewith), leather shoulder belts; bags; sporrans; credit card holders; card holders; key holders (in class 18) are similar to a low degree to the opponent's clothing (in class 25). [read post]
14 Mar 2019, 12:35 pm
State Farm Mutual Auto. [read post]
8 May 2014, 3:16 pm
In Trebro Manufacturing v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 8:04 am
Carter, Jr. upheld Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck’s order in Da Silva Moore, et. al. v. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 8:08 pm
State. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 4:54 am
Jive Commerce, LLC v. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 8:15 am
Their argument is based on an unpublished NJ Appellate Division decision, Bass v. [read post]
6 Jan 2016, 4:42 am
Facts: This case (Fleck et al v. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 2:16 pm
Grip-Pak, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 3:04 pm
A very similar case is pending before a three-judge-panel in Georgia – Georgia State Conf. of the NAACP v. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 11:11 am
De C.V. v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 4:07 am
In Seldon v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 4:07 am
In Seldon v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 4:07 am
In Seldon v. [read post]
6 Jan 2010, 9:29 pm
Bryan v. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 3:47 am
” Briefly: Noting in his column for The Atlantic that “state legislatures in the Bible Belt are openly flirting with laws designed to thwart any Supreme Court decision requiring recognition of gay marriage,” Garrett Epps urges the Court “to say forthrightly that when any agents of the state—legislators, judges, clerks—discriminate on this basis, they violate both the Constitution and their oath. [read post]
