Search for: "Quick v. State" Results 881 - 900 of 4,929
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jul 2011, 3:16 pm by jleaming@acslaw.org
New York marks the fifth state in a row in which marriage equality has been achieved legislatively rather than through state court intervention: soon after Varnum v. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 5:10 am by Eugene Volokh
Here's a quick summary of the case, from the intermediate appellate court decision: [E]ach plaintiff alleges that defendants violated her right to privacy under New York Civil Rights Law § 51 by misappropriating her likeness for use in the video game "Grand Theft Auto V. [read post]
10 Jun 2015, 11:43 pm by Jarod Bona
FTC More recently, the United States Supreme Court decided a case called North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
10 Jun 2015, 11:43 pm by Jarod Bona
FTC More recently, the United States Supreme Court decided a case called North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 11:55 am by Steve Bainbridge
But some quick Westlaw research kicked up a seemingly relevant case, which --oddly enough--also comes from Utah; namely, Utah Power & Light Co. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 11:02 am
 Again, the final version is available here.In Panetti v. [read post]
4 Jun 2007, 11:02 pm
A quick search of the SSI popular name database garnered the following results for people named after expensive cars. [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 6:18 am by Eric Goldman
” * Wired: 2017 Tech in Memoriam: Pour One Out for AIM, Vine, GChat, and the Rest * Adweek: Behind the Tumble of Tumblr, the Once-Hot Blogging and Social Advertising Player * FTC v. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 12:38 pm by Eric
As you can see from a quick perusal, doctors usually lose or voluntarily drop these lawsuits. [read post]
6 Jan 2023, 6:02 am by Richard Hunt
Dec. 13, 2022) is a meticulously written decision to which I cannot do justice in a quick hits review. [read post]
14 Jun 2021, 6:25 am by Jon Sands
The precedent, notably US v Bettancourt, 614 F.2d 214 (9th Cir. 1980), states that prior assaults are rarely permissible under 404(b). [read post]