Search for: "Roberts v. Russell" Results 441 - 460 of 770
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Nov 2019, 9:03 am by Lisa Heinzerling
” On Wednesday, the Supreme Court examined this clause during oral argument in County of Maui, Hawaii v. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 6:01 am by Administrator
The Lord Chancellor was reported to have said that the criticism by Sir Robert, if correctly attributed, was “manifestly a ridiculous exaggeration”. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 9:04 am by Amy Howe
Disclosure: Kevin Russell of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, was among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondent in Harris. [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 9:09 am by Ronald Mann
ShareThe holding of Wednesday’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. [read post]
16 Oct 2022, 4:10 pm by INFORRM
Guardian Australia has announced the launch of Ben Roberts-Smith v the media, a special 5-episode podcast series about the Ben Roberts-Smith defamation trial. [read post]
6 Jun 2018, 4:29 am by Edith Roberts
” At Quartz, Ephrat Livni discusses Dassey v. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 4:26 am by Edith Roberts
Briefly: For the South China Morning Post, Robert Delaney reports that the court’s decision in Animal Science Products v. [read post]
17 Jun 2020, 3:58 am by Edith Roberts
” For The Washington Post (subscription required), Robert Barnes reports that “those who saw oral arguments in the cases now collectively known as Bostock v. [read post]
13 May 2016, 8:12 am by Molly Runkle
[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondents in Zubik v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 4:02 am by Edith Roberts
Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. [read post]
15 Apr 2016, 6:22 am by Amy Howe
” Briefly: Commentary on this week’s supplemental briefs in Zubik v. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 6:50 am by Erin Miller
” On this blog, Kevin Russell writes about the Court’s call for the views of the Solicitor General in two ERISA petitions arising from the case Amara v. [read post]