Search for: "Rule v. Rule" Results 621 - 640 of 185,673
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2014, 9:16 am by Jaclyn Belczyk
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] 5-4 Monday in Town of Greece v. [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 8:14 am by Benjamin Minegar
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Wednesday in Ray Haluch Gravel Co. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2015, 8:45 am by Addison Morris
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Tuesday in Jesinoski v. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 9:36 am by Jaclyn Belczyk
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] unanimously Thursday in Clark v. [read post]
16 May 2012, 8:11 am
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia has handed down her ruling (350 page pdf) in the case of Cambridge University Press v. [read post]
30 May 2012, 6:37 am by Julia Zebley
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled unanimously [opinion, PDF] Tuesday in RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 9:30 am by Cleveland Law Library
These changes were precipitated by the United States Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 9:33 am
In the continuing saga of the Auto Admit case, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has ruled on the defendants’ motion to dismiss and motion to strike. [read post]
24 Aug 2012, 3:00 am by propertyprof
John Lovett (Loyola New Orleans) has posted Love, Loyalty and the Louisiana Civil Code: Rules, Standards and Hybrid Discretion in a Mixed Jurisdiction (Louisiana Law Review) on SSRN. [read post]
30 Mar 2021, 11:39 am by Jonathan Bailey
However, the decision surprised many, including myself, as the court’s previous fair use decision, the 2013 decision in the Cariou v. [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 7:33 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
This case shows that the so-called "rule of completeness" has its limits.The case is United States v. [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 4:45 am by Gene Quinn
In a nutshell, these new rules change existing practice by allowing new testimonial evidence to be submitted with a patent owner’s preliminary response, adding a Rule 11-type certification for papers filed in a proceeding, allowing a claim construction approach that emulates the approach used by a district court following Phillips v. [read post]