Search for: "Johnson v. State of California"
Results 1101 - 1120
of 1,391
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Feb 2009, 7:00 am
: Kelly and another v GE Healthcare Ltd (IP finance) (Mis)appropriation of Wii and PlayStation brands to name medical disorders (IPKat) Is regulation of trade mark attorneys necessary? [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 4:44 am
To be sure, there are gaps, inconsistencies, and mistakes, but the statistics chapter should be a must-read for federal (and state) judges. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 4:00 am
The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in, R. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2020, 3:47 am
” At ABC News, Devin Dwyer reports that “[t]he administration makes the case in a legal brief filed Thursday in” California v. [read post]
20 Nov 2021, 7:29 am
Gil v. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 7:23 am
” Thus, as the Solicitor General explainedto the Supreme Court in the recent United States v. [read post]
4 May 2016, 2:37 pm
With the exception of Johnson v. [read post]
11 Jan 2020, 4:28 pm
The case of United States v. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 8:18 am
Daoud v. [read post]
12 Mar 2019, 6:49 am
See, e.g., State v. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:17 pm
State of Tennessee, No. 06-6208 In civil rights suit alleging that city police discriminated against plaintiffs in violation of the Ame [read post]
9 May 2021, 4:07 pm
Kline School of Law; University of California, Berkeley. [read post]
20 Sep 2022, 7:56 am
The defendant also had two medical marijuana cards from California in his wallet. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 9:47 am
" The ruling also implied that the state's reticence left defendant Landrigan unable to meet his burden under the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in Baze v. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 5:00 am
For instance, the 1993 California case Johnson v. [read post]
21 Oct 2019, 12:15 am
Facebook is unhappy about the CJEU’s recent decision in Glawischnig-Piesczek v Facebook Ireland Ltd (C 18/18), which held that the social media company could be ordered by member states to remove equivalent content, worldwide when content is deemed illegal in a member state. [read post]
23 Sep 2018, 4:03 pm
Steel Corp. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2020, 8:42 am
They did not act on the federal government’s challenge to California’s “sanctuary state” laws, which prohibit state and local law enforcement officials from cooperating with federal immigration officials – for example, by providing information about individuals in custody or transferring inmates in their custody to federal immigration authorities. [read post]
11 Apr 2013, 3:33 pm
Supreme Court heard argument on the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage in California, and then on the legality of the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law prohibiting the payment of federal benefits to spouses in same-sex marriages. While the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and ransgender) movement is gaining force, the fact is that, as of April 11, 2013, same-sex… [read post]
