Search for: "Hughes v. State"
Results 1681 - 1700
of 1,786
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2017, 10:01 pm
Were he still alive, Manfred would enjoy seeing Elk Point, SD, with less than 2,000 residents, become the stage for Siouxland’s “trial of the century,” with BPI v. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 5:19 am
As for the injunction request, though it has yet to be properly examined in court, Judge Hugh R. [read post]
21 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm
An Iowa high court opinion, State v. [read post]
26 Nov 2010, 2:39 am
These include information on the applicant's race, religion, national origin, age, pregnancy status, marital status, disability, sexual orientation (some state and local jurisdictions), gender expression or identity (some state and local jurisdictions) and genetic information. [read post]
21 Aug 2024, 3:42 pm
EPA and Biden v. [read post]
19 Feb 2025, 11:21 am
Modern merger analysis—reflected in cases like 1974’s United States v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 9:01 pm
Maryland and United States v. [read post]
16 Aug 2024, 8:52 am
Second, it would appear doubtful that a paywall is strictly speaking a TPM, as stated at paragraph 31. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 6:27 am
In the wake of the UK Supreme Court decision in Warner-Lambert v Actavis (IPKat post here), second medical use claims have received considerable attention from the IP commentariat. [read post]
25 Jan 2024, 6:32 am
Supreme Court, and agreed that the FTC had made out a prima facie case under the burden-shifting framework commonly attributed to Baker Hughes. [read post]
24 Sep 2019, 1:52 pm
Move Press, LLC v. [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 6:30 am
I think it is somewhat telling that Jennifer’s caution leads her to try to ask if there are any real defenses for what I find one of the truly indefensible features of the Constitution—the allocation in the Senate of equal voting power by states. [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 12:04 pm
See Schulz v. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 9:01 pm
The court concluded that giving parents the right to participate as parties (and be represented by counsel) directly undermined the Supreme Court’s holding in Bellotti v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 8:37 am
" The standard under Franks v. [read post]
4 Jun 2023, 7:40 pm
Hughes v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 9:01 pm
In Burwell v. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 11:30 pm
I include those who are unemployed because, in most cases, unemployed people are now commonly assumed to be (paid) ‘job-seekers’ and may have certain social welfare entitlements which provide them with the most basic means for survival.[2] These distinctions may seem sharp and clear-cut as stated here. [read post]
22 Oct 2012, 3:21 am
Hughes. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 11:07 am
Michael Mabry stated the following in his declaration: “We havenever been contacted by Aurora nor [sic] any of its agents in person, by telephone or byfirst class mail to explore options for us to avoid foreclosure as required in CC § 2923.5. [read post]
