Search for: "State Of Washington, Respondent V T. A. D., Appellant" Results 61 - 80 of 175
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Dec 2017, 1:19 pm by ligitsec
Floyd Abrams, New York City, for respondents. [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 4:20 am by Edith Roberts
At The Washington Post’s Volokh Conspiracy blog, Dale Carpenter summarizes an amicus brief he filed last week in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 4:09 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: At the Election Law Blog, Christopher Elmendorf and Eric McGhee respond to Justice Neil Gorsuch’s complaint at last week’s oral argument in Gill v. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 8:54 am by Rory Little
The pun seems inevitable: In Wednesday morning’s oral argument in Class v. [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 9:28 am by Victoria Kwan
” Asked whether he was a feminist, he responded, “I don’t know what that is. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 4:29 am by Edith Roberts
In The Hollywood Reporter, Eriq Gardner reports that the court “has finally decided that it won’t review Lenz v. [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 7:22 am
State, supra.The appellate court went on to explain thatMr. [read post]
22 Sep 2016, 5:28 am by Josh Blackman
(Matt McClain/ The Washington Post) On June 25, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled in King v. [read post]
27 Jun 2016, 1:11 pm
 Washington State doesn't like that, so files an appeal. [read post]
20 May 2016, 9:08 am by John Elwood
Wiesman, 15-862, is a constitutional challenge to Washington regulations that require pharmacies to deliver lawfully prescribed drugs or devices to patients. [read post]
6 May 2016, 12:30 pm
Hamilton, 372 S.W.3d 140, 157, 159 (Tex. 2012) (citing §6; also citing comment b).We also note that a Texas appellate court has emphatically rejected an analogous argument that the learned intermediary rule shouldn’t apply to medical devices. [read post]