Search for: "In re: Justice v." Results 101 - 120 of 18,221
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jul 2014, 10:32 am
The defendant disagreed and argued that EPO decision could not have res judicata over a French court.The defendant invoked various grounds, the main ground being that an EPO decision originates from an administrative authority in charge of granting patents and not a court of justice handing down binding judgments. [read post]
17 Mar 2022, 8:20 am by Eugene Volokh
Re whether I could repost it, and he graciously agreed: The Court recently heard argument in Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 8:47 am by Carissa Byrne Hessick
But then, rather than deciding the case, the Justices set the case for re-argument and asked the parties to brief whether a portion of the ACCA is unconstitutionally vague. [read post]
15 Oct 2015, 11:52 am by Ronald Mann
SPOILER ALERT: If you’re reading this post to find out what the Justices and counsel had to say about the “derivative sovereign immunity” question Wednesday in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2016, 8:54 am by MBettman
On August 31, 2016, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in the case of In re: (C.C.S.), (C.L.S.) v. [read post]
29 Jul 2022, 6:11 pm by Kalvis Golde
A list of all petitions we’re watching is available here. [read post]
8 Feb 2007, 12:55 am
We're bound for Justice Bernard Fried's courtroom at 60 Centre Street, New York Supreme Court, to attend this morning's hearing in Sullivan & Cromwell v. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 7:59 am by Immigration Prof
Justice Neil Gorsuch could make a difference in the two immigration cases (Sessions v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 7:32 am by Steve Hall
” In 1990, Justice Thurgood Marshall asserted: “When in Gregg v. [read post]
10 Feb 2008, 7:16 am
Justice Connolly and his Gang of Six thought they had abolished the death penalty through the back door by banning Nebraska's electrocution method (State v. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Petitioner commenced the instant Article 78  proceeding to review the Executive Director's determination.* The Appellate Division, citing Ippolito v TJC Dev., LLC, 83 AD3d 57, ruled that the ALJ properly granted the Justice Center's motion to preclude Petitioner from relitigating the issues of whether she had a duty and breached her duty to provide adequate medical care to the Service Recipient as "The doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel… [read post]