Search for: "Irons v. State Bar" Results 141 - 160 of 670
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Sep 2019, 7:08 am by Samuel Bray
Grandin (292 U.S. 605 (1934)), in which the Court affirmed per curiam an interlocutory injunction barring the governor of North Dakota from exercising authority conferred by a state law to impose embargoes on sales of agricultural products out of the state. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 2:18 pm by Ilya Somin
Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (2014), where Sotomayor was one of only two justices to conclude that a Michigan referendum barring the use of racial preferences in state university admissions is unconstitutional. [read post]
16 Jul 2019, 6:57 pm by Amy Howe
In 1970, Stevens was nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit. [read post]
8 Jun 2019, 11:55 am by Ilya Somin
The decision was still backed by more recent precedent, most notably the Court's 1954 decision in Berman v. [read post]
31 May 2019, 7:05 am by Andrew Hamm
” At The Daily Beast, Ronald Goldfarb argues that the 1967 case United States v. [read post]
29 May 2019, 1:45 pm by Eric Goldman
And perhaps ironically, plaintiffs are thanking Facebook for its support of SESTA/FOSTA…by suing it too. [read post]
26 May 2019, 12:29 pm by John Floyd
  Uncomfortable with that instruction, Hillman contacted the Texas Center for Legal Ethics and the State Bar of Texas’s hotline seeking ethical guidance. [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 8:54 am by John Baker
Ironically, California — one of the plaintiffs — itself asks about citizenship. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 3:32 pm by Giles Peaker
Smailes & Poyner-Smailes v Clewer Court Residents Ltd, Cardiff County Court 30 January 2019 (Unreported but copy of judgment is here). [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 2:03 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Ironically, the FBI has itself even been used as a pawn in ransomware schemes, illustrating the hubris of ransomware purveyors and their overall sense of invincibility. [read post]
27 Dec 2018, 7:27 am by Eric Goldman
Lawyers may not state or imply another lawyer is part of the advertising firm if the statement or implication is untrue. [read post]