Search for: "B. v. S."
Results 121 - 140
of 51,921
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2025, 7:31 am
The Court had previously denied Reuters' summary judgment motions, but decided to revisit this following the US Supreme Court's decision in Andy Warhol Foundation v Goldsmith, 598 U.S. 508. [read post]
28 Feb 2025, 6:36 am
In a recent decision, Baker v. [read post]
28 Feb 2025, 4:02 am
§12112(b)(5)). [read post]
28 Feb 2025, 3:15 am
Mary the Virgin Bruton [2025] ECC B&W 1 The Rector and Churchwardens petitioned for a faculty to authorize the installation of a kitchen and servery unit in the north aisle of the church and two toilets on the ground floor of the tower, with a new meeting room and gallery above. [read post]
28 Feb 2025, 1:16 am
., tit. 8, § 10450(b)]. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 8:10 pm
At the Supreme Court, his case, Waetzig v. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 2:25 pm
Following the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Facebook v. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 12:25 pm
” The Ninth Circuit’s decision in PhotoMedex, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 9:07 am
Xia v. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 6:35 am
State v. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 3:56 am
Last year, a divided panel of the CAFC reversed the TTAB's decision in Chutter, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2025, 3:15 am
See Bushco v. [read post]
26 Feb 2025, 12:41 pm
Thus, the court largely affirmed the lower court’s orders regarding the plaintiff’s Equal Protection, LULAC Consent Decree, NVRA, and Civil Rights Act claims. [read post]
26 Feb 2025, 12:36 pm
” Perhaps the most comprehensive articulation to date of how this crackdown might play out can be found in then-FTC Commissioner Andrew Ferguson’s concurrence in the case of FTC v. 1661, Inc. d/b/a GOAT (December 2, 2024). [read post]
26 Feb 2025, 12:04 pm
On February 14, 2025, NLRB Acting General Counsel William B. [read post]
26 Feb 2025, 9:03 am
Supreme Court’s Decision in Starbucks Corp. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2025, 8:55 am
Shupe v. [read post]
26 Feb 2025, 6:00 am
Contrary to Petitioner's argument, the Appellate Division concluded that "a suspension of [Petitioner's] license for 180 days is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness".The Appellate Division unanimously confirmed the ALJ's decision without costs and dismissed the Article 78 petition challenging it.* 15 NYCRR 127.6 [b]Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's… [read post]
26 Feb 2025, 6:00 am
Contrary to Petitioner's argument, the Appellate Division concluded that "a suspension of [Petitioner's] license for 180 days is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness".The Appellate Division unanimously confirmed the ALJ's decision without costs and dismissed the Article 78 petition challenging it.* 15 NYCRR 127.6 [b]Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's… [read post]
