Search for: "Square v. State"
Results 861 - 880
of 5,800
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 May 2015, 4:24 am
A veto foreseeably will put the reform back to square one to the tune that the 2017 election will be conducted in the 2012 format. [read post]
6 May 2015, 9:28 am
Instead, the Court declined to consider this “until such time as the issue is squarely before us. [read post]
19 Oct 2016, 11:33 am
The motions to exclude were denied in part and granted in part Facts: This antitrust case (Gumwood HP Shopping Partners LP v. [read post]
12 May 2014, 1:38 pm
The Opinion of the Advocate General is very much a policy driven opinion; and hard to square with the wording and stated purpose of the DPD. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 12:26 pm
Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. [read post]
11 Dec 2024, 10:55 am
Twitter, Zimmerman v. [read post]
17 Apr 2023, 2:19 am
On Wednesday 19th and Thursday 20th April the Court will hear the case of Secretary of State for Transport v Curzon Park Ltd and others, on appeal from [2021] EWCA Civ 651. [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 4:47 pm
United States v. [read post]
6 Nov 2022, 7:48 am
Jefferson Properties, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Aug 2020, 6:50 am
Tenth Street Residential Association v City of Dallas, 2020 WL 4435429 (5th Cir. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 2:55 am
In 2012, Zulkiewski v. [read post]
27 Sep 2017, 7:20 pm
Petitioner Bonefish Grill, LLC sought to demolish the existing structure on its property and build a 5,400 square foot restaurant. [read post]
24 Mar 2011, 11:21 pm
The case of Patmainiece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions was reported in an earlier post. [read post]
11 Oct 2006, 10:01 am
United States v. [read post]
13 Aug 2008, 10:24 am
" Tran v. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 10:41 am
(Ilya Somin) The Supreme Court today issued a unanimous decision in favor of the property owners in the important case of Sackett v. [read post]
15 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm
United States v. [read post]
6 Dec 2024, 2:17 pm
As the court indicates, this concern remains conjectural today: the Government acknowledges that it lacks specific intelligence that shows the PRC has in the past or is now coercing TikTok into manipulating content in the United States (Note 1: the court then shifts the burden back on TikTok: “TikTok never squarely denies that it has ever manipulated content on the TikTok platform at the direction of the PRC. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 10:33 am
The United States Supreme court in South Dakota v. [read post]
22 Jun 2023, 10:24 pm
S. 162 (2011); United States v. [read post]
