Search for: "State v. Andrew C. Holder"
Results 1 - 20
of 81
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Mar 2013, 7:05 am
Looking ahead to oral arguments in United States v. [read post]
3 May 2009, 6:00 am
Smith, Andrew C. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 8:03 am
Moore, Yi Ni v. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 5:40 pm
Catalina v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 2:59 pm
Graham v. [read post]
14 Dec 2019, 12:01 am
In Shelby County v. [read post]
21 Aug 2022, 5:06 am
In National Assn of Broadcasters v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am
For present purposes, however, the important point to understand is that Trump’s primary merits argument, to which he devotes the first 13 pages of the Argument section of his brief (pp. 20-33), concerns only the second, middle “Officials Clause,” which identifies the current and former office-holders to whom Section 3 potentially applies, rather than the government positions that an insurrectionist or rebel is ineligible to occupy going forward. [read post]
28 Sep 2010, 7:38 am
Mike Dorf recaps an ABA webinar on last Term’s animal cruelty “crush video” case, United States v. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 6:18 am
He argues that “what Georgia — and other states — have done since” the Court’s decision in Atkins v. [read post]
18 May 2018, 3:56 am
" Oil States Energy Servs. v. [read post]
11 Apr 2010, 10:00 am
§ 1447(c).The Ninth Circuit has expressed a “strong presumption against removal. [read post]
16 Feb 2020, 9:01 pm
Holder. [read post]
15 May 2024, 7:41 am
Andrews, 534 U.S. 19, 27 (2001) (Ginsburg, J.); and Justices Scalia and Thomas have criticized the expansive use of the discovery rule as a “bad wine of recent vintage,” id. at 37 (Scalia, J., concurring); Rotkiske v. [read post]
1 Aug 2014, 2:54 am
Andrew Greenan will also attend. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am
(Designers Guild Ltd. v. [read post]
1 Jun 2013, 2:03 pm
But every now and then there could be a problem with a right holder wielding copyright in an effort to prevent interoperability, just like there are standard-essential patent (SEP) owners, like Google, who pursue injunctions. [read post]
