Search for: "In INTEREST OF FEW v. State"
Results 6101 - 6120
of 11,578
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jul 2016, 11:16 am
See Jacobellis v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 7:05 am
That trend has snowballed since 2013, when the Supreme Court struck down the core of the Defense of Marriage Act in the ACLU’s United States v. [read post]
12 Nov 2016, 1:53 pm
Chandler v. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 9:58 am
In the United States, such a mashup would fall squarely within the scope of the fair use right. [read post]
11 Apr 2010, 7:41 am
Selectica, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 8:34 am
Recently, in Kirschner v. [read post]
5 Feb 2012, 8:04 am
Virginia: Many states have, in the past few years, been reexamining their noncompete laws (some making it harder to enforce noncompetes, and some making it easier). [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 10:00 am
Through this case, Oglala Sioux Tribe v. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 10:59 am
The case, Gaskell v. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
" 4 NYCRR, in general, applies to employees of the State in the Classified Service[2]and the employees of public authorities, public benefit corporations and other entities for which the New York State Department Civil Service administers the Civil Service Law. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
" 4 NYCRR, in general, applies to employees of the State in the Classified Service[2]and the employees of public authorities, public benefit corporations and other entities for which the New York State Department Civil Service administers the Civil Service Law. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
" 4 NYCRR, in general, applies to employees of the State in the Classified Service[2]and the employees of public authorities, public benefit corporations and other entities for which the New York State Department Civil Service administers the Civil Service Law. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
" 4 NYCRR, in general, applies to employees of the State in the Classified Service[2]and the employees of public authorities, public benefit corporations and other entities for which the New York State Department Civil Service administers the Civil Service Law. [read post]
25 Apr 2023, 8:00 am
This was embargoed until a few moments ago. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 3:52 am
A few weeks back, in US v. [read post]
18 Oct 2008, 5:45 pm
There's so much interesting stuff in this case, perhaps it deserves a few more posts; I'd like to highlight a few things: Identifying parties -- For obvious reasons related to gambling being illegal in many parts of the United States, many of the 141 Domain Names defendants don't want to be identified. [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 1:26 pm
A few minutes earlier, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had suggested a narrow way out of the case. [read post]
23 May 2010, 2:16 am
According to Ars Technica, the most interesting disclosure was a YouTube training manual that stated that "user generated content should never be monitored. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 5:52 am
See also Khan v. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 3:48 am
The Delaware Supreme Court stirred up quite a bit of controversy earlier this year in the ATP Tours, Inc. v. [read post]
