Search for: "Edwards v. Lane"
Results 61 - 80
of 119
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Apr 2014, 5:35 am
On Monday, the Court heard oral argument in Lane v. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 2:13 pm
Arguing for Edward Lane, Tejinder Singh suggested a narrow holding that essentially reasserted Garcetti v. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 4:20 am
At the IIT Chicago-Kent Faculty Blog, Edward Lee analyzes Tuesday’s argument in the Internet TV case ABC v. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 10:26 am
Background Central to the resolution of Lane v. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 7:54 am
Supreme Court decided to hear the free speech retaliation case of Edward Lane. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 11:33 am
[Disclosure: The law firm of Goldstein & Russell, whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, represents Edward Lane, the petitioner in Lane v. [read post]
11 Jul 2013, 8:16 am
Edwards (2011) Pleasing the Court: Writing Ethical and Effective Briefs, by Judith D. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
Strangelove" (16) "Flight of the Conchords" (4) "Game Change" (2) "Get Smart" (1) "Gran Torino" (10) "Grey Gardens" (13) "I Shouldn't Be Alive" (4) "Limelight" (3) "Meet the Press" (20) "Moby Dick" (5) "My Dinner with Andre" (34) "Mystery Science Theater" (2) "Project Runway" (78) "Romy and Michele's High School Reunion" (3) "Seinfeld" (72) "Sex and the City" (14) "Slacker" (11) "Slumdog Millionaire" (16) "SNL" (60) "Sopranos" (50) "South Park" (71) "Star Trek" (12) "Star Wars" (25) "Survivor" (50)… [read post]
15 Apr 2013, 7:43 am
In Edwards v. [read post]
19 Jan 2013, 9:40 am
Oleg V. [read post]
2 Jan 2013, 3:17 pm
Defendant: EXPRESS LANE INC. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
Edwards Lifesciences (?) [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 11:40 am
In yesterday’s case (Tan v. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 2:38 pm
Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp. (1991) 500 U.S. 20; Zavala v. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 3:35 pm
Dobson & Ors v Thames Water Utilities Ltd (No 2) [2011] EWHC 3253 (TCC)This is very late as a post. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 3:35 pm
Dobson & Ors v Thames Water Utilities Ltd (No 2) [2011] EWHC 3253 (TCC)This is very late as a post. [read post]
30 May 2012, 6:00 pm
Lane v. [read post]
4 May 2012, 7:31 am
For those who do not have time, the short version is that the court rejected three distinct arguments: that the government violated Edwards by questioning the defendant without counsel present in the aftermath of his capture, that the defendants’ trio of subsequent written waivers of his Miranda and prompt-presentment rights were invalid, and that the government violated the 5th and 6th amendments by preventing defendant’s counsel from locating him after his capture. [read post]
2 May 2012, 7:00 pm
” Gilmer v. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 12:13 pm
Siegel Company v. [read post]
