Search for: "Spells v. State"
Results 901 - 920
of 2,211
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2022, 10:54 am
USCIS relies on a two-part analysis set out in Kazarian v. [read post]
28 Apr 2008, 4:02 pm
(The case is docketed as 07A304, Emmett v. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 9:52 am
On July 11, 2022, in LG Electronics Inc. v. [read post]
5 May 2021, 4:03 am
The student quoted a passage from a 1993 New Jersey Supreme Court decision, State v. [read post]
14 Sep 2022, 3:55 pm
From Yeshiva Univ. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 9:18 pm
But were a court to hold that Google’s algorithms “know” my emails the way a human employee would—and, accordingly, that I no longer have a reasonable expectation of privacy under United States v. [read post]
20 Oct 2017, 2:49 am
But years later, Marshall made his thoughts clear about the treaty clause in an 1823 decision called American Insurance Co. v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 2:45 am
Member States may however allow a work to be used, without its author’s consent, for the purpose of caricature, parody or pastiche. [read post]
30 Sep 2013, 6:51 am
Brazil v. [read post]
28 Feb 2017, 1:45 pm
Thirty years ago, in McCleskey v. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 12:24 pm
Today the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered its ruling in Case C‑583/12 Sintax [or, if you prefer, Syntax: the CJEU uses both spellings] Trading OÜ v Maksu- ja Tolliameti Põhja maksu- ja tollikeskus, a reference for a preliminary ruling from Estonia's Riigikohus. [read post]
26 Sep 2014, 12:39 pm
In Hellweg v. [read post]
17 Jun 2013, 4:40 am
In Glatt v. [read post]
27 Dec 2012, 9:30 am
Indeed, a state official (think of Rick Perry) might quite explicitly say that he is not willing to subordinate his loyalty to the state constitution to the national Constitution, either on (reasonable) grounds that the Constitution is radically defective (which it is) or less reasonable grounds that he is no longer sure he wants to affirm the very notion of Union that the Constitution instantiates. [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 2:54 am
In re Thomas, 79 U.S.P.Q.2d 1021, 1024 (TTAB 2006) (citing Palm Bay Imports, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 4:08 am
” (That case, Gill v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 2:32 pm
The Weyhrauch case tests whether the law applies to a state official if that official did not violate any state law. [read post]
24 May 2019, 3:59 am
” Since the likelihood today is that the two highest-profile cases testing new laws as forbidden “bills of attainder” both involve President Trump or his Administration in one way or another, it is useful to note that the Supreme Court went the furthest to spell out the meaning of the clause in a famous decision in 1977, Nixon v. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 7:42 am
Citing the 2015 Florida Supreme Court decision in Sanislo v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 12:43 pm
Finally, the Court also issued its opinion in United States v. [read post]
