Search for: "Jones v. District Court"
Results 1561 - 1580
of 2,826
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Dec 2021, 5:30 am
Judge Jones dissented: The majority holds that the district court lacked jurisdiction because a non-diverse defendant remained from the original lawsuit. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 12:00 pm
Supreme Court’s Sackett v. [read post]
9 Dec 2019, 2:00 am
Wright-Young v. [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 9:46 am
District Court for the Eastern District of Texas on the basis of the applicants’ HIV-positive status. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 3:45 am
The 8th District has been probably the most AWA-hostile court in the state, and it burnishes that reputation in Hannah v. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 9:01 pm
Jones, 10–1259 (U.S. [read post]
5 Nov 2011, 7:28 am
The district court's inequitable conduct finding is correct. [read post]
21 Nov 2024, 8:31 pm
For Bondi, the NFIB's hiring of Jones Day "accelerated the decision to switch. [read post]
22 May 2008, 11:58 am
Vernor v. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 2:22 pm
Eli Lilly & Co. v. [read post]
26 May 2014, 9:01 pm
That day fell on the 50th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Brown v. [read post]
11 May 2009, 12:42 pm
Jones v. [read post]
13 Jan 2015, 2:54 am
Yesterday morning the Court heard oral arguments in Reed v. [read post]
18 Mar 2014, 9:26 am
Jones in some detail. [read post]
3 Mar 2017, 2:00 am
As the New York Times reports, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument this week in Packingham v. [read post]
3 Mar 2017, 2:00 am
As the New York Times reports, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument this week in Packingham v. [read post]
27 Nov 2010, 1:29 pm
Based on Jones and Martin, we conclude the district court did not err by denying the motion to suppress the evidence. [read post]
28 Oct 2012, 5:30 am
AND JAMES EDWARD JONES, JR., No. 12-0038 Per Curiam This appeal is on its second trip to the Texas Supreme Court. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 2:09 pm
Circuit held in Jones v. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 1:37 pm
The former Fifth Circuit noted that the Supreme Court, in Jones v. [read post]
