Search for: "People v. Fries"
Results 81 - 100
of 238
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Oct 2017, 11:55 am
Several people have recently asked this blogger whether it's illegal to attribute false statements to American celebrities in Kenyan ads. [read post]
28 Sep 2017, 9:45 pm
Because "We the people" (or at least the white male property owners) adopted it. [read post]
16 Jun 2017, 12:50 pm
As many LHB readers are aware, the Law and Society Association hosts "Collaborative Research Networks" that sponsors panels for its annual meeting. [read post]
2 Jun 2017, 1:27 pm
The 435,000 people currently eligible for the program must seek renewed status every 18 months from DHS. [read post]
21 May 2017, 5:47 pm
New Mexico v. [read post]
16 May 2017, 6:28 pm
” Harland Sanders used his military title (also an honorary rank in a state militia, here of course Kentucky) to sell fried chicken. [read post]
14 May 2017, 5:28 pm
In Obergefell v. [read post]
25 Feb 2017, 3:58 am
The law recognizes the existence of the Fourth Estate in such decisions as New York Times v. [read post]
14 Jan 2017, 8:41 am
Kentucky Fried Chicken complaint. [read post]
9 Dec 2016, 11:03 am
Schaefer v. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 9:39 am
Crash Statistics Reflect Increased Traffic Fatalities in First Half of 2016 Law Professors Misunderstand Texas Work Injury Law Gandy v Camp Thurman: Trespassing and Texas Premises Liability Law Attorney Versus Food: Fried Chicken, Frivolity, and Tort Reform Take human fickleness out of the equation. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 3:06 pm
Fried Chicken Law? [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 4:31 pm
Loved the office and the people. [read post]
8 Feb 2016, 4:27 pm
You might want to read Egelhoff v. [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 4:38 am
— via The Emplawyerologist Are smarter people actually less racist? [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 8:12 am
Now it’s time for all of us to hunker down with some chocolate-covered french fries and Malört and prepare to ride out the Snowtorious B.I.G. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am
In Europe, The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the consent of a copyright holder does not cover the distribution of an object incorporating a work where that object has been altered after its initial marketing to such an extent that it constitutes a new reproduction of that work (Case C‑419/13, Art & Allposters International BV v Stichting Pictoright) with Eleonora opining that the decision means that that there is no such thing as a general principle of… [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 11:11 am
In Apple v. [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 3:00 am
I blogged here about United States v. [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 3:00 am
I blogged here about United States v. [read post]
