Search for: "State v. Light"
Results 9441 - 9460
of 26,003
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Oct 2022, 5:00 am
In a recent decision, Everport Terminal Services, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 12:36 pm
Declaring the NLRB’s rationale to be “nonsense,” on March 26, 2024, a unanimous three-judge panel for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Stern Produce Company Inc v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 3:43 pm
However, an important exception is noted in the recent case of Samantha C. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 4:57 pm
In United States v. [read post]
15 Aug 2023, 6:39 am
For more than a few years — at least since the United States Supreme Court’s seminal 2017 decision in Epic Systems v. [read post]
6 May 2009, 11:42 am
Here's a link to CAAF's opinion in United States v. [read post]
22 Mar 2022, 10:46 am
From Judge William Session III in Ha v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 6:26 am
The Supreme Court’s Muldrow v. [read post]
31 Oct 2014, 6:41 pm
In Williams v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 7:45 am
In 2017, the Washington Supreme Court ruled unanimously for the same-sex couple in Arlene’s Flowers v. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 4:00 pm
Mississippi 17-7245 Issue: Whether the death penalty, in and of itself, violates the Eighth Amendment in light of contemporary standards of decency and the geographic arbitrariness of its imposition. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 4:30 am
Leja v. [read post]
2 Jul 2007, 3:01 pm
Williams v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 9:00 pm
United States, 128 S. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 11:43 am
Unites States (funding for federal housing)Different Horse v. [read post]
19 Jan 2008, 11:58 am
§ 1983, and for malicious prosecution, defamation, and tortious interference with a prospective contract, pursuant to Ohio state law. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
In short, the court concluded in LePage v. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 12:09 pm
For example, the Texas Supreme Court recently handed down a decision in Lesley v. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 12:09 pm
For example, the Texas Supreme Court recently handed down a decision in Lesley v. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 2:04 am
In concluding that Kogan had not sufficiently contributed to the screenplay [para 85], even by adding to the first three drafts, Hacon J considered the following points and authorities: Adding elements not themselves covered by copyright, such as scenic effects, is not a sufficient contribution (as per Tate v Thomas [1921] 1 Ch 503)Providing helpful criticism and expert feedback on the work is not a sufficient contribution (as per Wiseman v George Weidenfeld &… [read post]
