Search for: "Russell et al"
Results 161 - 180
of 409
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2013, 4:46 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in this case.Issue: Whether Congress’ decision in 2006 to reauthorize Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act under the pre-existing coverage formula of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act exceeded its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and thus violated the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the United States Constitution. [read post]
18 Jun 2013, 8:18 am
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, represented Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company et al. as an amicus in support of the petitioner in Federal Trade Commission v. [read post]
17 Jun 2013, 9:35 am
The firm also represented Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company et al. as an amicus in support of the petitioner in FTC v. [read post]
17 Jun 2013, 5:46 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Shelby County. [read post]
16 Jun 2013, 3:49 pm
Actavis 12-416Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, also represented Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company et al. as an amicus in support of the petitioner in this case.Issue: Whether reverse-payment agreements are per se lawful unless the underlying patent litigation was a sham or the patent was obtained by fraud (as the court below held), or instead are presumptively anticompetitive and… [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 7:38 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Shelby County v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 11:38 am
Actavis 12-416Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, also represented Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company et al. as an amicus in support of the petitioner in this case.Issue: Whether reverse-payment agreements are per se lawful unless the underlying patent litigation was a sham or the patent was obtained by fraud (as the court below held), or instead are presumptively anticompetitive and… [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 9:46 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in this case. [read post]
4 Jun 2013, 8:45 am
Italian Colors Restaurant, et al., No. 12-133 (argued February 27, 2013) and 3) offers of judgment under FRCP Rule 68 in Fair Labor Standards Act collective actions and the effect on FRCP Rule 23 class actions (Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. [read post]
29 May 2013, 7:51 am
Also, in Kiobel, Goldstein & Russell, P.C. represented Achmed et al. and the Center for Justice and Accountability as amici curiae in support of the petitioners. [read post]
23 May 2013, 8:12 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Shelby County v. [read post]
21 May 2013, 7:49 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Shelby County v. [read post]
13 May 2013, 6:17 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in this case.] [read post]
9 May 2013, 5:52 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Shelby County.] [read post]
3 May 2013, 4:52 pm
Chomsky, Noam, et al. [read post]
2 May 2013, 9:27 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in this case.] [read post]
1 May 2013, 7:29 am
Code Secs. 47-25-1101 et seq.]. [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 6:48 am
James Sensenbrenner et al., who filed an amicus brief in support of the respondent in this case.] [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 8:49 am
” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C. represented Achmed et al. and the Center for Justice and Accountability as amici curiae in support of the petitioners.] [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 6:54 am
” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C. represents Achmed et al. and the Center for Justice and Accountability as amici curiae in support of the petitioners.] [read post]
