Search for: "Michigan v. March" Results 641 - 660 of 1,196
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Nov 2011, 10:06 am by Neil Rosenbaum
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals last week affirmed a denial of class certification in Pilgrim v. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 12:31 am
This approach was on display during the dense and complex arguments in Samantar v. [read post]
13 May 2015, 6:00 am by Martha Engel
In March, Flying Dog Brewery of Virginia won a long and hard fought First Amendment battle over the trademark RAGING BITCH in the state of Michigan. [read post]
3 Jun 2016, 6:40 am by Dennis Crouch
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, et al., No. 15-1314 4. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 12:30 pm by Amy Howe
The Justices considered two of the cases on this week’s Conference – Michigan v. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 12:32 pm
One of the men confessed that the group had robbed nine different stores in Michigan and Ohio between December 2010 and March 2011, supported by a shifting ensemble of 15 other men who served as getaway drivers and lookouts. [read post]
In March 2019, the US Supreme Court denied an application for stay of the order from a Michigan District Court refusing to block the ban. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 9:07 am by Aidan O'Neill QC, Matrix.
The Ministerial exception in US case law On 28 March 2011 the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Perich v. [read post]
23 May 2023, 12:58 am by INFORRM
  On the same day, there were hearings on applications for injunctions in the cases of Payone v Logo and Searl v Dimova-Handley. [read post]
15 Mar 2017, 1:39 pm by Steven Boutwell
The petition asserts that: the Local Emergency Planning Committee (“LEPC”) disclosure requirements are open ended, will result in a significant security risk, and that EPA failed to give notice that it may alter the final rule being open-ended; the EPA changed the third-party audit criteria to include an arbitrary trigger that is subject to the whims and imagination of an agency, and EPA did not properly notice or address this change; the EPA did not include information on its… [read post]