Search for: "Price v. United States" Results 1701 - 1720 of 5,300
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Dec 2009, 4:04 pm by John W. Arden
Supreme Court's ruling, in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc, v. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 9:39 am by Aurora Barnes
United States 17-7177 Issue: Whether, when a criminal defendant has already been convicted of an offense in a state criminal proceeding, the United States may thereafter prosecute the defendant for the same offense without violating the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition on double jeopardy. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 12:51 pm by Mike Sykuta
S. 281 (1988), we used those terms to refer to the importation of foreign-manufactured goods bearing a valid United States trademark without the consent of the trademark holder. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 2:32 pm by Lyle Denniston
Representing the United States will be Deputy Solicitor General Michael R. [read post]
26 Jan 2021, 8:51 am by Florian Mueller
Instead, Conti has now brought a new complaint specifically against Nokia in Delaware state court, and that one has the potential to become one of the most interesting FRAND cases worldwide (this post continues below the document):21-01-25 Continental v. [read post]
7 May 2010, 3:53 am by Russ Bensing
  First this:  On Tuesday, in State v. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 11:54 am by Jeff Wurzburg (US)
United States and California (Civil Action No. 4:18-cv-00167) (previous HL Pulse discussion here). [read post]
15 Jan 2007, 8:20 am
Assistant to the Solicitor General Patricia Millett will argue on behalf of the United States, which filed an amicus brief supporting vacatur in the Safeco case and reversal in GEICO. [read post]
15 Nov 2014, 1:54 pm by Kirk Jenkins
 In the closing days of its September term, the Illinois Supreme Court agreed to take up Price v. [read post]
15 Apr 2016, 6:03 am by Marty Lederman
The Court will not reach the merits of the DAPA case, United States v. [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 11:30 pm by Theodore Ruger
Last summer, the Supreme Court put its money where its mouth was in terms of federalism doctrine in its landmark decision about the Affordable Care Act (ACA), in NFIB v. [read post]