Search for: "Quick v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 4,817
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 May 2012, 8:21 am by Daniel S. Swinton, Esq.
v=In1IJocVor8Quick facts 5.4 million Americans are living with Alzheimer's disease. [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 9:05 am by Eric Goldman
Photo credit: 3D Quick Link Crossword // ShutterStockTrespass to Chattels * Crapps v. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 12:23 pm by Anthony Gaughan
Just as a quick follow up to Jeff Schmitt’s post below, it is worth pointing out Justice Anthony Kennedy’s very short but extremely unusual concurring opinion in Trump v. [read post]
28 Jun 2018, 7:15 am by MICHAEL ETIENNE, MATRIX
Judgment in the case of R (Steinfeld & Anor) v Secretary of State for International Development [2018] UKSC 32 is here. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 10:26 am
  It's by John Wagner.Senate President Thomas V. [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 8:35 pm by Lisa Larrimore Ouellette
For those who haven't been paying attention, here's a quick rundown:Section 271(b) states: "Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer. [read post]
11 Jul 2021, 8:41 am by Eric Goldman
” Quirky opinion. * Protocol: I helped build ByteDance’s censorship machine Privacy * Some empirical data on the volume and costs of DSRs pursuant to the CCPA * State v. [read post]
2 Jun 2015, 10:34 am by MBettman
On June 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of Ohio will hear oral argument in the case of State of Ohio v. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 2:03 pm
A quick visit to the SCOTUS blog revealed that the State of Louisiana has filed its final brief asking for cert regarding Kennedy v. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 8:51 am by Eric Goldman
Photo credit: 3D Quick Link Crossword // ShutterStock * United States v. [read post]
14 Jul 2014, 6:48 am by MBettman
On July 8, 2014, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the case of State of Ohio v. [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 4:42 am
Here, as in Valsamaki, there was virtually no evidence of any kind that any such extreme circumstances existed, but rather it appeared that the City was using quick-take proceedings to gain a litigation and negotiating advantage rather than proceeding from and with the requisite justification demanded by the federal and state due process requirements, and the specific language of the statute.The opinion is available in PDF format. [read post]