Search for: "Murphy v. United States" Results 761 - 780 of 1,011
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jan 2017, 9:01 am by Tejinder Singh
He has also cited and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
2 Sep 2022, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
All this suggests that providing pseudonymity to members of particular religious groups might violate the principle of the Texas Monthly v. [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 3:34 am by Kelly
Murphy (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) District Court South Carolina – SEO/Web design consultant faces contributory trademark liability for ‘Copycat’ e-commerce site: Roger Cleveland Golf v. [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 9:18 am by fjhinojosa
Longan, Symposium on Ethics, Professionalism, and the Role of the Attorney General of the United States: Lessons from History, 72 Mercer L. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 10:12 am by John Elwood
(He might have had to answer some more difficult questions, though, since he was even then seeking to regularize his immigration status after entering the United States unlawfully.) [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 3:33 pm by Robert Chesney
  In that regard, compare this fact pattern to United States v. [read post]
30 Apr 2020, 9:59 am by John Elwood
Texas, 18-9674, and United States v. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 11:49 am by Jack Sharman
  As the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in United States v. [read post]
22 Jan 2010, 8:43 am by Erin Miller
He filed more than 400 petitions, motions, and briefs in the Supreme Court of the United States, and orally argued 13 cases there, including Immigration and Naturalization Service v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 2:35 pm by Rekha Arulanantham
As Perez put it, “I took an oath to enforce the Constitution and the law of the United States. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 3:00 am by Peter A. Mahler
  Matter of Murphy (United States Dredging Corp.), 74 AD3d 815, 2010 NY Slip Op 04794 (2d Dept June 1, 2010),  a stock valuation case where the Second Department affirmed the trial court's application of the discount for lack of marketability to the corporation's entire enterprise value and not just its good will value. [read post]