Search for: "California v. Force"
Results 6081 - 6100
of 6,451
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jun 2008, 11:36 am
Supreme Court, May 27, 2008 Riley v. [read post]
30 May 2008, 9:09 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: WHO members near accord on global strategy on IP and health: (Intellectual Property Watch), (GenericsWeb), (Gowlings), (IAM), Copiepresse seeks up to €49 million from Google in lawsuit over right to feature links to publishers’ content on internet: (IPKat), (Ars Technica), (Techdirt), (Out-Law), (IP Law360) Singapore ‘image… [read post]
30 May 2008, 6:00 am
" The article reports on a lawsuit filed in October 2007, Hild v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 12:12 pm
Ministry of Defense v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 11:35 am
Pratt Construction Co., Inc. v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 10:06 am
Dep't of the Air Force, No. 06-35644 In a suit brought against the Air Force challenging the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy after plaintiff was suspended from duty as an Air Force reservist nurse on account of her sexual relationship with a civilian woman, dismissal of the suit for failure to state a claim is reversed in part where: 1) the DADT, after Lawrence v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 9:50 am
Ctr. for Women v. [read post]
23 May 2008, 1:00 pm
The ADF brief also effectively quotes from the Supreme Court's 2004 Lockyer v. [read post]
22 May 2008, 2:56 pm
In New York Times Co. v. [read post]
21 May 2008, 2:11 pm
In this, it was following the lead of the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, which ruled in 2004 that under Lawrence v. [read post]
21 May 2008, 11:29 am
First gay marriage in California. [read post]
21 May 2008, 11:03 am
Dept. of the Air Force, case no. 06-35644 (9th Cir. [read post]
21 May 2008, 10:26 am
BoydThe California Supreme Court has granted a petition for review in Schachter v. [read post]
21 May 2008, 9:32 am
Supreme Court reaffirmed the rule in the Quill v. [read post]
21 May 2008, 9:32 am
Supreme Court reaffirmed the rule in the Quill v. [read post]
19 May 2008, 8:55 am
Supreme Court, May 12, 2008 Gonzales v. [read post]
19 May 2008, 8:47 am
Station v. [read post]
16 May 2008, 11:05 am
Ethan makes a similar point in talking about California's proposal for district-based awarding of electors, suggesting that such a proposal, if passed would force people to fully grasp the problems with the Electoral College and to shift their focus to a constitutional amendment. 2) The Supreme Court strikes down an attempt to achieve the result through means other than constitutional amendment. [read post]
15 May 2008, 5:31 pm
See Herrington v. [read post]
15 May 2008, 10:46 am
State & Richard Wallace v. [read post]
