Search for: "Long v. Hooks"
Results 81 - 100
of 752
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Aug 2012, 9:30 am
It had a long-standing policy of collecting zip-codes and merely continued its practice in light of these two decisions. [read post]
2 Dec 2020, 8:11 am
On Monday, the Supreme Court finally heard oral argument in Van Buren v. [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 2:35 pm
The Ruiz v. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 4:00 am
Regarding obviousness, the FCA disagreed with the trial judge’s approach to framing the Apotex v. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 1:03 pm
" Why do courts say shit like that when they let someone off the hook?] [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 2:22 pm
Elms v. [read post]
23 Nov 2007, 4:13 am
Once the Court repeatedly stayed other cases in October and early November, the next obvious hook for the story -- lacking a fresh angle, as Fears' story does -- would be when the main challenge, Baze v. [read post]
30 Mar 2009, 8:56 pm
And then you really need to know about this case, Long Beach Memorial Medical Center v. [read post]
2 Mar 2013, 1:58 am
Another article described the constituency as a two-horse race and stated: “Voting Labour here in Eastbourne and Willingdon will just let our expenses scandal MP off the hook. [read post]
9 Jun 2013, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court case from 2004, National Archives and Records Administration v. [read post]
2 Jul 2007, 2:50 pm
Here is the complaint in the Pearl Oyster Bar v. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 11:30 am
Importantly, in this case, the employer had engaged in a long list of bad-faith behaviors. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 10:53 am
That was the question of United States v. [read post]
23 Aug 2020, 11:07 am
IPWatchdog reported on the Court’s opinion in Illumina Inc. v. [read post]
18 Sep 2014, 7:08 pm
"Goldin v. [read post]
7 Aug 2015, 8:34 am
Mullings is off the hook. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 8:03 pm
In contrast, trustees act personally and as this case demonstrates may end up personally on the hook for commitments they make as trustees. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 3:12 pm
The current case is Travelers Indemnity Co v. [read post]
9 Aug 2014, 10:35 am
Vermont North Properties v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 11:23 am
As a result, if the Supreme Court adopts the activity/inactivity distinction, it seems likely that future Congresses will use whatever hook the Supreme Court says is required — and not one iota more — to make sure their laws pass judicial muster.We saw this with Congress’s reaction to United States v. [read post]
