Search for: "Specter v. Specter"
Results 681 - 700
of 956
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Aug 2010, 11:39 am
Earlier I wrote about how Sestak is trying to make the campaign sort of a Bill Clinton v. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 7:56 am
Day v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 10:12 am
Texas and Romer v. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 11:03 pm
Dissent by Judge DYK raised the specter of a rehearing, as to whether an isolated DNA sequence is patentable subject matter (§101). [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 2:58 pm
[Thanks, But No Thanks] BarBri Fortune Cookie [BarBri] The Bar Exam Isn’t Senseless, and Neither Is Law, Part II [Ricochet] Earlier: A Bar Exam Parody / Hypothetical, Courtesy of Elizabeth Wurtzel Bar Exam Review Question of the Day: Laurence Tribe v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 12:27 pm
Leonard v. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 8:12 am
Following Tuesday’s Second Circuit decision in Fox v. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 6:42 am
Arizona in light of the Court’s recent decision in Berghuis v. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 12:56 pm
[Post by Venkat] Does v. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 12:32 pm
The case is entitled Scott et al. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 7:51 am
In the case of Monroe v. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 7:57 am
Paul Kane and Amy Goldstein report at the Washington Post that Kagan is likely to be confirmed with little Republican support — and possibly without a vote from Democrat Arlen Specter. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 7:37 am
Meanwhile, Ilya Shapiro speculates at Cato@Liberty that Senator Arlen Specter may not vote for Kagan. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 11:38 am
See POM Wonderful LLC v. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 2:34 pm
ELENA KAGAN: Senator Feinstein, I do think that the continuing holding of Roe and Doe v. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 1:19 pm
In Lockheed v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 7:37 pm
The recent City of Ontario v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 8:24 am
The amendments would legislatively overrule what Senator Specter has called ``two errant decisions of the Supreme Court’’, namely the 1994 Central Bank of Denver v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 1:40 pm
Arlen Specter (D-Penn.) had included an “anti-Stoneridge” provision in the Senate version of the Act, but it failed to garner sufficient support. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 3:29 pm
Supreme Court decision in Stoneridge Investment Partners v. [read post]
