Search for: "HARTNESS v. STATE"
Results 61 - 80
of 1,134
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jul 2023, 4:33 pm
A change to venue law frees state attorneys-general from involuntary transfers of antitrust actions from their home states to distant forums handling multi-district litigation involving the same subject matter. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 2:55 am
However, the traditional “surviving patent” approach according to Harnkatheterset is now under some scrutiny: A referral to the CJEU by Munich I Regional Court resulted in the decision C-44/21 Phoenix Contact v Harting, in which it was held that a “surviving patent only” approach is incompatible with the Enforcement Directive. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 9:05 pm
“In Sackett v EPA, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that EPA had overstepped its authority,” said NCBA Chief Counsel Mary Thomas Hart. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 12:01 pm
One web-based media report stated, without qualification, that Agent Orange “increases bladder cancer risk. [read post]
1 Jul 2023, 4:44 am
Over at Balkinization, an interesting conversation is unfolding on the uses of history in Supreme Court decisionmaking, especially as pertains to the recent Haaland v. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 8:55 am
Here is the abstract: Now that Roe v. [read post]
29 Jun 2023, 9:05 pm
See generally Brown Shoe Co. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2023, 10:50 pm
State of California, Dept. of Motor Vehicles (2023) 88 Cal. [read post]
25 Jun 2023, 6:00 am
The rule that disqualifies persons who are not 35 years of age from eligibility for the Presidency of the United States is quite hard or rigid. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 12:00 am
Extent: 448ISBN: 9781509944903Imprint: Hart PublishingPublisher: Bloomsbury Publishing [read post]
6 Jun 2023, 8:00 am
The Limits of Our Tolerance for Acts of Foreign States: The Legacy of Kuwait Airways (Nos 4 and 5)Michael Douglas10. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 4:56 am
Lerner is consistent with a long line of prior appellate case law holding that, under New York choice-of-law rules, the issue of shareholder derivative standing is “substantive,” not “procedural,” and therefore, determined by the laws of the state of incorporation, not the law of the forum: Hart v Gen. [read post]
14 May 2023, 11:28 am
Padilla One More Time: Facebook Isn’t a State Actor–Atkinson v. [read post]
11 May 2023, 7:38 am
Twitter COVID Skeptic Loses Lawsuit Over Account Terminations–Hart v. [read post]
10 May 2023, 10:54 am
See United States v. [read post]
7 May 2023, 7:42 am
Department of HHS Facebook & Twitter Defeat Lawsuit Over Account Terminations of COVID/Mask Skeptic–Hart v. [read post]
16 Apr 2023, 7:52 am
Twitter COVID Skeptic Loses Lawsuit Over Account Terminations–Hart v. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 1:28 am
Daimler and Nokia v. [read post]
4 Apr 2023, 2:36 pm
{Nor does the Supreme Court's decision in Harte-Hanks Communications v. [read post]
29 Mar 2023, 5:01 am
If you just blithely ignore it, and publish the story despite having been told that it may well be mistaken, that would be textbook "reckless disregard," which would allow liability even in a public official case: Consider, for instance, Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. [read post]
