Search for: "Goldstein Law Firm"
Results 921 - 940
of 1,446
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2014, 7:42 am
It decided that SCOTUSblog fails both of these tests: “Law-firm partner Thomas C. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 5:57 am
Yesutis, a partner at the law firm Alston & Bird who specializes in banking regulation. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:33 am
Tom Goldstein and other Court observers think it is very unlikely he would upend the solution he apparently negotiated in Hobby Lobby. [read post]
16 Jul 2014, 5:30 pm
– New York attorney Michael Goldstein of Becker & Poliakoff on the firm’s Corporate & Capital Law Blog Senator Rockefeller Convenes Another Hearing to Protect Cruise Passengers – Miami attorney Jim Walker of Walker & O’Neill on his blog, Cruise Law News Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby Decision and Unionization – Atlanta attorney Brennan Bolt of McKenna Long & Aldridge on the firm’s blog,… [read post]
7 Jul 2014, 7:08 am
Roth, Esq., of The Roth Law Firm, PLLC, of Manhattan, represented Mr. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 12:40 pm
Argentina Law v. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 12:07 pm
Arriving at the Supreme Court, each party pressed for an aggressive change in labor law. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 10:08 am
Charlotte Garden teaches labor & constitutional law at Seattle University School of Law, where she is an assistant professor and Litigation Director of the Korematsu Center for Law & Equality. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 3:48 am
However, I am not affiliated with the firm. [read post]
1 Jul 2014, 6:30 am
However, I am not affiliated with the firm.] [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 3:13 pm
[Disclosure: The law firm of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in Mach Mining and Gelboim; however, the author of this post operates independently of the firm.] [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 4:05 am
[[Disclosure: The law firm of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Halliburton. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 10:28 pm
One thing I find noteworthy: Only one of them (Goldstein) works for a major law firm (though probably most or many of them have, at one time or another). [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 5:20 am
[Disclosure: The law firm of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel to the petitioner in Loughrin and Lane and on an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Halliburton. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 1:15 pm
[Disclosure: The law firm of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel to the petitioner in Loughri [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 1:06 pm
Goldstein and his law firm, it could not, under the rule, serve as a client-generating vehicle for either. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 12:53 pm
[Disclosure: The law firm of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, served as counsel to the petitioner in this case. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 9:31 am
” The Committee explains that it would reconsider its decision only if the blog were “to separate itself from Goldstein & Russell and any other lawyer or law firm who is arguing before the Supreme Court” (emphasis added). [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 4:29 am
However, I am not affiliated with the firm.] [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 11:53 am
However, the author of this post is not affiliated with the firm.] [read post]
