Search for: "Feather v. State" Results 61 - 80 of 192
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2017, 4:23 am by Edith Roberts
The first was in National Association of Manufacturers v. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 5:05 pm by Steve Gottlieb
Numerous federal, state and local statutes prohibit public officials from accepting anything of value precisely because the quid pro quo is never stated but  always understood. [read post]
9 Jun 2017, 8:45 am
" You can access Tuesday's 3-to-2 ruling of the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, in Alliance to End Chickens as Kaporos v. [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 12:30 pm by Eugene Volokh
As yesterday’s 11th Circuit decision in Ocheesee Creamery LLC v. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 11:25 pm
In referring the question on Art 3(a) as to what was required for a product to be protected by a basic patent, he stated that he was “encouraged by what the [CJEU] said in Actavis v Sanofi and Actavis v Boehringer to believe that there is a realistic prospect of the Court providing further and better guidance to that which it has hitherto provided” (para 91). [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm by Graham Smith
If the lengthy incubation has produced a swan, it is one whose feathers are already looking distinctly ruffled following the CJEU judgment in Watson/Tele2, issued three weeks after Royal Assent. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:23 pm by Graham Smith
If the lengthy incubation has produced a swan, it is one whose feathers are already looking distinctly ruffled following the CJEU judgment in Watson/Tele2, issued three weeks after Royal Assent. [read post]
22 Sep 2016, 10:00 am by Michael Grossman
Third: Three states (CA, MS, WV) do not a totalitarian regime make. [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 5:36 am by Joy Waltemath
Therefore, the Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment in his employer’s favor (Wiest v. [read post]
8 Dec 2015, 3:55 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Fortunately, the Chief Justice is well known for guiding the Court in a manner that respects the function of an Article III court, evidenced by the decision in the Michigan v. [read post]