Search for: "Beer v. United States" Results 241 - 260 of 516
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Nov 2013, 8:05 pm by Ron Coleman
 ”Because the University of Alabama is a state entity, it cannot be joined in a case in federal court. [read post]
30 Oct 2013, 10:07 am by Rachel, Law Clerk
The Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies Rules for the Division of Property in Buttar v. [read post]
30 Oct 2013, 10:07 am by Rachel, Law Clerk
The Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies Rules for the Division of Property in Buttar v. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 9:58 am by Michael F. Smith
Given the fundamental question it poses regarding an electorate’s right to amend its own state constitution, Schuette v. [read post]
8 Sep 2013, 10:36 pm by Steve Baird
With more than 26,000 Subway locations throughout the United States, and all the advertising done on the local and national level for the largest restaurant chain in the world, I shutter to think how many errant TM symbols are swinging in the wind, must be millions upon millions. [read post]
28 Jun 2013, 3:29 pm by Kevin
United States (the internment case), on the grounds that the government knowingly submitted false information to the court in 1944. [read post]
13 May 2013, 8:08 pm by Ron Coleman
Unfortunately, the consensus of United States legal authority on what is generic rather than descriptive, and vice-versa, has become somewhat discordant. . . . [read post]
6 May 2013, 3:00 am by Administrator
University of Alberta Faculty of Law BlogThe right to silence In the United States, and to a similar extent in Canada, the right to silence is sacred. [read post]
21 Apr 2013, 9:45 am by John W. Arden
The Justice Department had contended that the $20.1 billion transaction would substantially lessen competition in the market for beer in the United States as a whole and in 26 metropolitan areas across the United States. [read post]
14 Apr 2013, 6:32 am
The long-anticipated trial in the case of Diocese of Quincy, et al. v. [read post]
31 Mar 2013, 7:51 am by Heidi Meinzer
The United States Supreme Court handily sided with Aldo, ruling unanimously that K9 officers had no such duty to maintain field performance history and records of purported “false positives. [read post]
31 Mar 2013, 7:51 am by Heidi Meinzer
The United States Supreme Court handily sided with Aldo, ruling unanimously that K9 officers had no duty to maintain field performance history and records of purported “false positives. [read post]