Search for: "State v. Mai"
Results 1261 - 1280
of 133,188
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jul 2024, 1:54 pm
In Dept of State v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 1:29 pm
Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 12:23 pm
The Court in Loper expressly stated that it is not overturning previous cases that relied on Chevron. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 11:48 am
Department of State et al v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 11:48 am
Department of State et al v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 10:58 am
Supreme Court vacated a DC Circuit ruling in the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) whistleblower case Lissack v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 10:31 am
" Otherwise the gynecologist is also guilty, for they surely perform the physical movements of the act, and voluntarily so.The erroneous instruction here may well be harmless, because there was no evidence that Mr. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 9:51 am
”] From Abitbol v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 8:59 am
The case before the Court, Snyder v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 8:50 am
The FSB report, dated May 29, 2019, read like a Cold War-era dossier. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 8:33 am
Over the years, Chevron‘s scope has been shaped through cases like United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 7:21 am
State v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 6:55 am
Back in May 2024, the Federal Circuit issued an important decision holding that a patentee’s use of Amazon’s patent enforcement process (APEX) to target an alleged infringer’s listings can subject the patent owner to specific personal jurisdiction in the alleged infringer’s home state – despite no direct contacts with that state. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 6:51 am
United States. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 6:00 am
Appeal of M.A., 61 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 18,070 [citing Kihl v Pfeffer, 94 NY2d 118, 122 (1999), which states that “mere denial of receipt” is insufficient to rebut a presumption of service]). [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 6:00 am
Appeal of M.A., 61 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 18,070 [citing Kihl v Pfeffer, 94 NY2d 118, 122 (1999), which states that “mere denial of receipt” is insufficient to rebut a presumption of service]). [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 4:00 am
In Law Society of Ontario v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 3:19 am
In Chutter, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jul 2024, 1:57 am
The Judge re-stated the need to make allowance for editorial judgment, citing the principles summarised in Banks-v-Cadwalladr [2022] 1 WLR 5236. [read post]
9 Jul 2024, 10:30 pm
Even then “that right may be restricted by the need to fulfil the legitimate expectations of a beneficiary of the measure, who has been led to rely on the lawfulness thereof”: Case C-365/89 Cargill v Produktschap voor Margarine, Vetten en Oliën paragraph 18, citing Case 14/81 Alpha Steel v Commission. [read post]
