Search for: "Tucker v. Lower" Results 21 - 40 of 126
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 May 2021, 8:59 am by Eugene Volokh
Given the lower level of First Amendment protection that the Court has historically given over-the-air television and radio broadcasting, some policing by the FCC of alleg [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 2:34 pm by Phyllis H. Marcus
The FTC won at summary judgment, and the lower court entered an injunction and directed Tucker to pay $1.27 billion in restitution and disgorgement. [read post]
2 Mar 2021, 1:03 am by CMS
On 12 February 2021, the Supreme Court joined the lower courts and unanimously rejected TWL’s appeal. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 11:00 am by Steve Vladeck
Three and a half years into the Trump administration, the solicitor general has sought emergency relief — to stay a lower-court ruling or lift a lower-court stay — on 36 separate occasions, including 14 alone during the October 2019 term. [read post]
8 Oct 2020, 7:52 am by James Romoser
Oracle Supreme Court fight (Tucker Higgins, CNBC) Questions for Amy Coney Barrett (Linda Greenhouse, The New York Times) U.S. [read post]
[v] Currently, that doctrine has been replaced with a modified civil law which creates a servitude on lower lands to take on water from their uphill neighbor. [read post]
28 Jan 2020, 5:14 am by Charles Sartain
Co-authors Paul Yale and Rusty Tucker Herein, highlights from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Briggs, et al. v. [read post]
12 Nov 2019, 3:42 am by Edith Roberts
Patent and Trademark Office v. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 4:07 am by Edith Roberts
Tucker Higgins reports for CNBC that the court “denied a petition from pizza giant Domino’s … to hear whether its website is required to be accessible to the disabled, leaving in place a lower court decision against the company. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 1:54 am by Edith Roberts
” Additional coverage comes from Tucker Higgins at CNBC and Gabriella Munoz at The Washington Times. [read post]
13 Sep 2019, 4:07 am by Edith Roberts
Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. [read post]