Search for: "Sweeney v. United States" Results 41 - 60 of 114
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Jun 2016, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
The press was united in horror this week, reacting to the news that Labour MP Jo Cox was murdered outside a constituency surgery. [read post]
24 Feb 2016, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
Accordingly, said the court, this case was governed by the rule of New York Times Co. v Sullivan, 376 US 254, in which the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as embodying "the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. [read post]
4 Oct 2015, 11:24 pm by INFORRM
On the same day there will be the hearing of an appeal from the Master in the case of Bates v Leeds United FC. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 10:06 am by Steve Vladeck
When the Supreme Court hears argument Monday morning in Coleman-Bey v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 6:40 am by Joy Waltemath
Both efforts have proved unavailing (Zoeller v Sweeney, November 6, 2014, Dickson, B). [read post]
29 May 2013, 3:18 am
Consequences for International Law Milena Sterio, A Tale of Two States: Territoriality and Minority Rights in Kosovo and Georgia Alena Douhan, CIS, CSTO and the United Nations: Could an Active Regional System of Collective Security Be Established? [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 1:00 pm by admin
Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, in a case that could ultimately decide the fate of sports betting in the United States, In February, U.S. [read post]
16 Nov 2012, 2:47 pm by Taryn Rucinski
Hot, crowded, and legal: a look at industrial agriculture in the United States and Brazil.  18 Animal L. 185-205 (2012).Vargas Gallegos, Nathaniel.  [read post]
22 Jul 2012, 5:33 pm by Dwight Sullivan
After becoming a senior judge, he dissented in one more summary disposition Fosler remand — United States v. [read post]