Search for: "United States v. Rogers & Rogers"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,649
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2024, 10:37 am
Over the course of two days of oral arguments, former President Donald Trump’s attorneys aimed at the 150-year-old foundations of the practice of appointing special counsels in the United States. [read post]
24 Jun 2024, 7:30 am
Liggett v. [read post]
22 Jun 2024, 4:00 am
Below is my column on Fox.com on the ruling in United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 12:25 pm
The pioneers of the field and many who followed in their footsteps weren’t trying to fashion a body of law for a rapidly expanding administrative state by being exclusively self-referential—that is, by focusing only on our own idiosyncratic experiences and needs in the United States. [read post]
4 Jun 2024, 7:31 am
Last updated: 07/31/2022 People who follow the news in the United States are not strangers to disturbing legal stories that often dominate the headlines. [read post]
15 May 2024, 10:10 am
United States v. [read post]
1 May 2024, 1:21 pm
" United States v. [read post]
1 May 2024, 11:04 am
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 43. [read post]
30 Apr 2024, 12:52 am
t=Cariou%20v.%20Prince Rogers v. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 11:33 am
A few months after the Oregon hearings, Judge Weinstein, in the fall of 1996, along with other federal and state judges, held a “Daubert” hearing on the admissibility of expert witness opinion testimony in breast implant cases, pending in New York state and federal courts. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am
In December 1996, Judge Jones issued his decision that excluded the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses’ proposed testimony on grounds that it failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 702.[5] In October 1996, while Judge Jones was studying the record, and writing his opinion in the Hall case, Judge Weinstein, with a judge from the Southern District of New York, and another from New York state trial court, conducted a two-week Rule 702 hearing, in Brooklyn. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 5:00 am
For instance, the 2017 case A.B v. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 5:57 am
Jeffery-Poulter, p. 148 – 150. [4] Dudgeon v the United Kingdom App no 7525/76 (ECtHR, 22 October 1981). [5] United Nations’ Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. [6] CEDAW/C/OP.8/GBR/1 2018 – paras. 83 – 85. [7] [2018] UKSC 27. [8] The Abortion Act 1967: a biography of a UK law, S. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 1:43 pm
But if Rogers survives, that’s what it does. [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 8:57 am
Justice Scalia was exactly right about this—and for that matter, so was Chief Justice Marshall, who clarified this very point in his circuit opinion in United States v. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 12:13 pm
Then, in Lexmark v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 7:47 pm
Tomorrow, on February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral argument in Trump v. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 3:24 pm
Rogers (D.D.C. 1972) (noting that the Supreme Court's Graham case "made clear" that "state laws restricting aliens' power to own land … was based on obsolete premises"); Smith v. [read post]
1 Feb 2024, 10:01 am
On June 8, 2023, the United States Supreme Court decided on Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 7:54 pm
[This post is co-authored with Professor Seth Barrett Tillman] On January 18, Professor Akhil Reed Amar and Professor Vikram Amar filed an amicus brief in Trump v. [read post]
