Search for: "State v. W"
Results 901 - 920
of 15,631
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2023, 9:01 pm
”The Court Apparently Scraps its DictumHeller’s statement about the endurance of felon-in-possession laws was consistent with the Court’s ruling in that case and McDonald, but it seems flatly inconsistent with last year’s decision in New York State Pistol & Rifle Association v. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 10:15 am
Schutte v. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 10:01 am
The Act thus cannot be justified by Bishop v. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 9:28 am
In addition, the requirement of reciprocity in order to take a credit for taxes paid to another state (i.e., that the other state must grant a similar credit against Louisiana individual income tax) is eliminated. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 5:58 am
In Anderson v. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 6:30 am
It was famously rejected in McCulloch v. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 5:00 am
In the case of Rotella v. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 2:59 am
R (on the application of Wang and another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 21. [read post]
18 Jun 2023, 12:42 pm
’” Department of Transportation v. [read post]
18 Jun 2023, 6:00 am
UN(x)) Where W(x) represents a real number social utility value for some state of affairs (or possible world) X, F is some increasing function that yields a real number, U1(x) is a cardinal, interpersonally comparable utility value yielded by some procedure for individual 1 for state of affairs X, and N is the total number of individuals. [read post]
17 Jun 2023, 2:14 pm
., United States v. [read post]
17 Jun 2023, 7:08 am
Doe 1 v. [read post]
17 Jun 2023, 3:45 am
John v. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 9:30 pm
W. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 1:16 pm
In Davis v. [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 12:04 pm
Justice Sotomayor expressed reluctance stating “I have some hesitation doing away with the Rogers test” which protects First Amendment rights.[9] The Supreme Court’s June 8, 2023 Unanimous Decision In its opinion, the Supreme Court stated that the Court initially needed to decide whether “the company [should] have had to satisfy the Rogers threshold test before the case could proceed to the Lanham Act’s likelihood-of-confusion inquiry” and… [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 11:54 am
Justice Sotomayor expressed reluctance stating “I have some hesitation doing away with the Rogers test” which protects First Amendment rights.[9] The Supreme Court’s June 8, 2023 Unanimous Decision In its opinion, the Supreme Court stated that the Court initially needed to decide whether “the company [should] have had to satisfy the Rogers threshold test before the case could proceed to the Lanham Act’s likelihood-of-confusion inquiry” and… [read post]
16 Jun 2023, 11:46 am
Justice Sotomayor expressed reluctance stating “I have some hesitation doing away with the Rogers test” which protects First Amendment rights.[9] The Supreme Court’s June 8, 2023 Unanimous Decision In its opinion, the Supreme Court stated that the Court initially needed to decide whether “the company [should] have had to satisfy the Rogers threshold test before the case could proceed to the Lanham Act’s likelihood-of-confusion inquiry” and… [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 9:01 pm
I was lead counsel in Rasul v. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 4:05 am
In United States v. [read post]
