Search for: "Duck v. State"
Results 621 - 640
of 752
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2011, 12:00 am
(Thursday night I ducked out of the reception early, to catch the Padres v. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 5:10 am
Yet no State has standing? [read post]
6 Sep 2024, 5:19 am
Applying the historical tradition test from New York Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. [read post]
22 May 2007, 5:15 am
See Bebchuk v. [read post]
29 Jul 2024, 9:01 pm
”Biden singled out Trump v. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 4:02 am
Take the case of Hutto v. [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 9:01 pm
In Monroe v. [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 5:53 am
And after Brown v. [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 12:41 pm
The most obvious historical analogy — the Court’s disgraceful and widely condemned decision to duck the issue of interracial marriage when it first presented itself in Naim v. [read post]
31 Dec 2020, 11:41 pm
There'll be a spectacular Epic Games v. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 9:00 am
There was therefore no error in the case. (1) Defendant’s challenge to the second step of the Batson analysis was preserved; (2) The State’s proffered explanations for its use of peremptory challenges were racially neutral; (3) The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the defendant failed to show purposeful discrimination under the totality of circumstances State v. [read post]
28 Feb 2022, 9:40 pm
On Monday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit handed down its Continental v. [read post]
16 Jan 2007, 4:04 am
That question was recently put to the test in the case of McKesson Information Solutions, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2009, 1:00 pm
* Two of President Bush's lame-duck pardons were Long Island real estate developers convicted of fraud. [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 4:24 am
An excellent example of this trend can be found in the Wisconsin case of State v. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 9:01 pm
In my column today, I explore what might be learned from the decision by the House of Representatives last week and the seemingly imminent (as of this writing) decision of the Senate this week to pass a bill that seems on its face to directly violate the clear text of the Constitution. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 2:17 am
The answer has recently been summarised in Viceroy Cayman Limited v Anthony Otto Syrowatka [2021] ATMO 159 (Viceroy v Syrowatka), stating “[i]t is well established that ownership of a trade mark is established either by authorship and prior use, or by the combination of authorship, the filing of the application and an intention to use or authorise use”. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 2:17 am
The answer has recently been summarised in Viceroy Cayman Limited v Anthony Otto Syrowatka [2021] ATMO 159 (Viceroy v Syrowatka), stating “[i]t is well established that ownership of a trade mark is established either by authorship and prior use, or by the combination of authorship, the filing of the application and an intention to use or authorise use”. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 4:30 am
United States, 333 US 46 (1948), the United States Supreme Court ruled that res ipsa loquitur applied in Jesionowski v. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 8:20 am
This comes from Pearson v. [read post]
