Search for: "United States v. Cherry" Results 101 - 120 of 317
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2010, 2:29 pm by Bexis
P. 8(a) adopted by the United States Supreme Court in Ashcroft v. [read post]
17 Jan 2010, 10:20 pm by Steve Baird
A lot can be learned from the easily searched trademark registrations existing on the United States Patent and Trademark Office's online database. [read post]
29 May 2012, 3:16 pm by Leland E. Beck
At the end of last month, this blog noted that the United States District Court for the District of Columbia would hear cross motions to dismiss / summary judgment in National Restaurant Association [NRA] v. [read post]
3 May 2022, 1:32 am by Jack Bogdanski
There are lot of ignorant, bigoted, dangerous people in the United States, more than you ever would have thought. [read post]
1 Mar 2007, 10:20 am
On Tuesday, the Court heard argument in Winkelman v. [read post]
24 Feb 2007, 3:54 am
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has oral arguments scheduled in Cincinnati, Ohio for the two weeks of March 5, 2007 thru March 16, 2007 Some Kentucky cases are: March 5, 2007    4  06-5619    Bouggess v. [read post]
13 Jan 2023, 8:00 am by Guest Blogger
  But this valve of healthy constitutional democracies is not discussed or theorized enough in the United States, for obvious practical reasons. [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 7:54 am by OLF
The United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky issued a Memorandum Opinion & Order in in Case No. 3:19-cv-464-BJB on July 18, 2022. [read post]
5 May 2015, 9:24 am by Nassiri Law
It should also be noted, when comparing how California treats restaurant workers compared to other states with a lower minimum wage and tip offset credits, California, and especially Los Angeles, has one of the highest costs of living in the United States. [read post]
13 Aug 2015, 2:00 am by Sam Claydon, Olswang LLP
The defendants’ arguments The defendants relied upon the decision in MGN Limited v United Kingdom (2011) 53 EHRR 5, in which the European Court of Human Rights found a number of flaws in the pre-Jackson regime, namely that: it lacked focus and there were no formal requirements for entering into a CFA; parties had little incentive to control costs, which would be assessed only at the end of a case; the regime had the “chilling” effect that parties would feel… [read post]