Search for: "United States v. Place" Results 661 - 680 of 23,916
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jun 2016, 2:20 pm by Andrew Hamm
United States and also in Whole Woman’s Health. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 2:31 pm by The Federalist Society
In an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, the Court held that (1) Lexmark exhausted its patent rights in toner cartridges sold in the United States through its "Return Program"; and (2) Lexmark cannot sue Impression Products for patent infringement with respect to cartridges Lexmark sold abroad, which Impression Products acquired from purchasers and imported into the United States, because an authorized sale outside the United States,… [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 11:00 pm by Rosalind English
This question is at the core of the case of Sufi and Elmi v United Kingdom, in which the Strasbourg Court has ruled that the state of chaos prevailing in Somalia is so dire that repatriation there would amount to a breach of the prohibition on torture and inhuman treatment under Article 3. [read post]
23 Aug 2016, 7:59 am by becassidy
Rhodes, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants intentionally created and maintained a segregated school system based on race in violation of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. [read post]
4 Mar 2023, 4:13 am by jonathanturley
The 53-page letter informs the U.N. that there are a host of barriers now in place for women and girls in the United States that deny them their human rights. [read post]
6 Sep 2018, 1:38 pm by Eric Muller
United States (1943), where the Court upheld a racial curfew? [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 7:24 am by Beth Hutchens
Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court handed down its opinion on the Stolen Valor Act (18 U.S.C. [read post]
8 Sep 2016, 5:11 am by Yishai Schwartz
” The West Bank, not the United States, is the place in which the Palestinian Authority and PLO are “amenable to suit. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 9:31 am by Tom
Friend, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously agreed that a corporations “principal place of business,” for purposes of determining whether federal courts have diversity jurisdiction (that is, all parties on one side of the versus (“v”) sign are from states different from all parties on the opposite side) to hear a case. [read post]