Search for: "Parrish v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 187
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Dec 2011, 2:55 pm by JB
That is why Calabresi and Rickert look to Congressional and state ratification debates, and to newspaper editorials and political speeches. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 9:27 am by Eugene Volokh
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
24 Aug 2009, 7:01 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com]   Highlights this week included: US CAFC affirms that patent ownership (and standing) can vest through operation of law: Sky Technologies v SAP AG (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Patently-O) (Property, intangible) US CAFC grants en banc request to challenge written description requirement: Ariad v Lilly (Patently-O) (Filewrapper) (Washington… [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 2:35 pm by Mark Zamora
See also Georgia State Bar Rules, DR 7-102(A)(3), (4) and (5); DR 7-106(C) (1); Rule 4-102(d) Standard 45 and O.C.G.A. [read post]
21 Jun 2009, 10:00 pm
(ITC 337 Law Blog) Academic perspectives on issues raised in Bilski case (IP Osgoode) Star Scientific teaches a valuable lesson to all IP share investors (IAM) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: Appealing BPAI rejections to the Federal Circuit: In re Baggett (nonprecedential) (Patently-O) CAFC: Preliminary injunctions and obviousness in design patent law: Titan Tire Corp v Case New Holland, Inc (Patently-O) District Court N D Illinois: Post-filing assignment cannot create standing:… [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 4:10 pm by tjsllibrary
Parrish KF9227.C2 P37 2010 From the Publisher: From the late nineteenth century to the present, decisions by the Supreme Court have played a significant role in how American governments, especially at the state level, have carried out the death penalty. [read post]
26 Jul 2006, 12:25 pm
See also Georgia State Bar Rules, DR 7-102(A)(3), (4) and (5); DR 7-106(C) (1); Rule 4-102(d) Standard 45 and O.C.G.A. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 4:09 pm by rhapsodyinbooks
From this he concluded that the amendment did not prevent states from abridging privileges and immunities arising from citizenship of the state as opposed to citizenship of the United States. [read post]
5 Mar 2019, 7:10 am by Joy Waltemath
Reviewing the parties’ summary judgment decision, the appeals court concluded that the factors described in United States v. [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 2:10 am by Lauren M. Gregory
Though the California Court of Appeal for the Second District affirmed a lower court’s ruling that the employee’s malicious prosecution suit could not proceed, Parrish v. [read post]