Search for: "MATTER OF T F" Results 7701 - 7720 of 13,445
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Sep 2022, 5:23 am by Eugene Volokh
[Jack Goldsmith and I will have this article out in the Texas Law Review early next year, and I'm serializing it here. [read post]
14 Aug 2013, 12:49 pm by Orin Kerr
” Granted, as a matter of retroactivity law, Gant provided the governing law. [read post]
31 Mar 2012, 12:50 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  What if we turned 2(f) into a floor on the amount of time to acquire distinctiveness? [read post]
6 Dec 2017, 1:19 pm by ligitsec
Pp. 560-569. 723 F.2d 195 (CA2 1983), reversed and remanded. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 4:04 pm
The bottom line is that there is no reason believe the Court didn’t mean exactly what it said. [read post]
15 Nov 2008, 4:09 pm
  Don't you wish you could, to paraphrase William F. [read post]
5 Jan 2018, 8:00 am by Liz Kramer
General Mills, Inc., 854 F.3d 420 (8th Cir. 2017).Non-Signatories Get Divergent Results. [read post]
25 Oct 2009, 3:46 am
The court found that plaintiffs hadn't shown likely success on the merits. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 6:31 pm by KC Johnson
In the meantime, the university needs to focus on the messages it presents to the world and figure out the right strategies to get those messages across, says John F. [read post]
25 Jan 2022, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
Wayne County, 805 F.3d 228, 250–51 (6th Cir. 2015) (en banc). [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 10:49 pm
  That this the district chose to pursue this matter, given the depth of outrage, is shocking. [read post]
28 Jan 2007, 12:56 pm
Shaheen, RHU REBC Vice President - The Horton Group, Law Practice Division 221North LaSalle, Suite 910 Chicago, Illinois 60601 v: 312-917-8623/f: 312-324-9223/ c: 708-715-6623 paul.shaheen@thehortongroup.com www.thehortongroup.com [read post]
29 Mar 2018, 4:33 am by Edith Roberts
” In an op-ed for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse weighs in on the question of whether and when appellate judges may consult the facts outside the record in a case, suggesting that “there should be a line between facts — and attitudes — that judges can apply to the matter at hand, and those they can’t. [read post]