Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Oyez Project is an unofficial online multimedia archive website for the Supreme Court of the United States. It was initiated by the Illinois Institute of Technology 's Chicago-Kent College of Law and now also sponsored by Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute and Justia .
Under Secretary of State for Management 1982–83, best known as the named party in the landmark corporate law case of Smith v. Van Gorkom , 488 A.2d 858 ( Del. 1985). Literature and journalism
Both couples sued the State of Arkansas, alleging that the birth certificate law violated the Constitution. The trial court agreed, but the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed, reasoning that the statute was about the biological relationship between a mother and a child, and thus did not violate the precedent set in Obergefell v.
The Supreme Court hears arguments Thursday over whether former President Donald Trump can be kept off the 2024 ballot because of his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, culminating in ...
National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Smith, 525 U.S. 459 (1999), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the NCAA's receipt of dues payments from colleges and universities which received federal funds, was not sufficient to subject the NCAA to a lawsuit under Title IX.
Smith v. United States , 568 U.S. 106 (2013), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States of America . [ 1 ] The case was argued on November 6, 2012, and decided on January 9, 2013.
Coinbase must face a lawsuit by customers who accused the largest U.S. cryptocurrency exchange of illegally selling securities without registering as a broker-dealer, a federal judge ruled on Friday.
Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court case that involved issues concerning statutory standing in antitrust law.. The decision established the rule that indirect purchasers of goods or services along a supply chain cannot seek damages for antitrust violations committed by the original manufacturer or service provider, but it permitted such claims ...