Search for: "People v. John (1983)" Results 41 - 60 of 332
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Nov 2016, 7:43 am by John Jascob
By John Filar AtwoodSEC Enforcement Director Andrew Ceresney believes that the Supreme Court appeared to be sympathetic to the government’s claims in the recently-argued Salman v. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons, a case dealing with the impact of copyright’s first sale doctrine — 17 USC § 109(a) — on the Copyright Act’s importation prohibition — 17 USC § 602(a)(1). [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons, a case dealing with the impact of copyright’s first sale doctrine — 17 USC § 109(a) — on the Copyright Act’s importation prohibition — 17 USC § 602(a)(1). [read post]
13 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
“By definition these were people who had never written a book. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 9:17 am by John Elwood
John Elwood reviews Friday’s cases. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 6:06 pm by Timothy P. Flynn
To paraphrase Chief Justice John Roberts, when you put 10,000 mostly drunk people in the middle of nowhere, 8 cops are just not enough to keep the peace.We here at the Law Blogger would add: the object of the event is to determine who can ski the fastest being pulled behind a snowmobile. [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 4:33 am by Howard Wasserman
" In 1983, the Royals were playing the Yankees at Yankee Stadium on a Sunday afternoon. [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 7:31 am by Howard Wasserman
Long before John Roberts went before the Senate Judiciary Committee, this game had people talking about baseball and the law, even prompting some legal scholarship on the case as demonstrating statutory interpretation, judicial decisionmaking, and legal processes. [read post]
30 Dec 2018, 6:28 am
New York: Summit Books, 1983.Kutler, Stanley I. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 1:16 pm by Lorenzo d’Aubert, Eric Halliday
Barrett’s willingness to look past possible abuse of discretion and violation of due process decried by the dissenting judges echoes Chief Justice John Roberts’s deferential reasoning in Trump v. [read post]