Documents

Amicus Curiae Brief — White-Rodgers v. Bitler

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2005

As might be an- ticipated over such a significant period of time, key differ- ences have arisen in its interpretation. … To paraphrase Justice Cardozo, conclusions in the air, so to speak, will not do. See Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R., 162 N.E. 99, 99 (N.Y. 1928).

Amicus Curiae Brief — New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Kevin P. Bruen, in His Official Capacity as Superintendent of New York State Police, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Jul 15, 2021

Laws ch. 625 ............................29 PERIODICALS A Search For Knives, BUFFALO DAILY COURIER, Mar. 5, 1888 ...............................................................9 Angelo Carbone Insane, … Judge Foster’s Acts Now Under Review, N.Y. TIMES, May 18, 1912, at 24.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Massachusetts

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1984

Delta Air Lines, Inc., U.S. » B03 B.CE. coccccecces 8. 15, 2890 (1983)... weer eee eee n er eerees 18 Tuvia Convalescent Center, Inc. v. … Delta Air Lines, Inc., U.S. ° 103 §$.Ct. 2890 (1983).

Amicus Curiae Brief — US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2002

The general criticism of the commentators was acknowledged and addressed in a later Supreme Court case, Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287, 300, n. 20 (1985). … Air, Inc., 228 F.3d 1105, 1122-1123 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (Gould, J., concurring). Compare 21 CHARLES A. WRIGHT & KEN- NETH A.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Google LLC, Petitioner v. Oracle America, Inc.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Feb 18, 2020

. § 512(g)(3)(C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Copyright Alternative in Small Claims Enforcement Act (H.R. 2426, S. 1273 116 th Cong. 1st Sess.) . . 12 Digital Millennium Copyright Act … (“[f]air use should be perceived . . . as a rational, integral part of copyright, whose observance is necessary to achieve the objectives of that law.”).

Amicus Curiae Brief — Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 890 (2016) (No. 15-446)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2016

INTRODUCTION Congress passed the America Invents Act (AIA)? … The complaints aired here by Petitioner stem from a deeper desire to return to the more lucrative system that came before.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Joseph Miller, et al., Petitioners v. James V. McDonald, Commissioner, New York State Department of Health, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Sep 3, 2025

(cleaned up). … The parent plaintiffs objected to sending their 14- and 15-year-old children to any school at all, because doing so removed their children from their community during a formative adolescent period.

Amicus Curiae Brief — National Labor Relations Board v. Gissel Packing Co.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1969

first half of that period had been satisfactory. Moreover neithér Johnson could recall ever having criticized his work to Paxton during that whole period. … No. supervisor. ever’‘made any comment: to. Aldridge about any other motor or engine that he worked on.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Jaffe v. Snow

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1993

Linde Air Products Co., 336 Nee sas a edibalatennincdeiibilavneddeiondsieins 13 Haitian Refugee Center v. Gracey, 809 F.2d 794 (D.C. … Linde Air Products Co., 336 U.S. 271, 275 (1949); see also Goodman v. Lukens Steel Co., 482 U.S. 656, 665 (1987).

Amicus Curiae Brief — Bowen v. Roy

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1986

This Court has long recognized the principle that general ectfare benefit: ( owneet of rondo (he porta @ ihe ow dew rited eters Bere commented to the fiemg of the: bew! … could to seuaged eee me dere cunts of emceier appears seme (| othe Berd of the Sweet 61) Beem eeeeememg emcees Gor cum (he opgertems:, for freed woes wememe fer 8 fr er mee) cegeeremmeme of coer aire

Amicus Curiae Brief — New York v. Sullivan (Nos. 89-1392, 89-1391)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1990

Do new regulations etapa by HHS under Title X of the Public Health Service Act which prohibit abortion counselling, referral and advocacy in programs funded under the Act and require physical separation … Comment, The Title X Family Planning Gag Rule Can the Government Buy Up Constitutional Rights? 41 Stan. L. Rev. 401, 408 (1989).

Amicus Curiae Brief — Bank of America Nat. Trust and Sav. Assn. v. 203 North LaSalle Street Partnership

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1999

ACREL’s membership consists of over 800 attorneys from nearly every state and the District of Columbia, all of whom have concentrated their practice in real estate law for a period of ten years or … Although those arguing that the new value corollary survived the adoption of the Bankruptcy Code do so on the basis that “Congress . . . does not write ‘on a clean slate.” Dewsnup v.

Amicus Curiae Brief — EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Co.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1991

Baylor os of Medicine, 805 F.2d I 28 | Air Line Dispatchers Ass'n v. National Mediation | Board, 189 F.2d 685 (D.C. … denied, 342 U.S. 849 (1951) (amendment to Railway Labor Act which extended coverage to air carriers “engaged in interstate or foreign commerce” held not to apply outside the United States in the absence

Amicus Curiae Brief — Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2002

Linde Air Prods. Co., ee eC ee crrreerennssenesenssrntenenmees passim Hilton Davis Chem. Co. v. Warner-Jenkinson Co., 62 F.3d 1512 (Fed. … Reg. 53 (Mar. 19, 2001) (requesting comments on the SPLT). For all these reasons, the Festo majority exceeded its authority in this case. Perhaps it is for Congress to determine this issue.

Amicus Curiae Brief — United States ex rel. Eichenlaub v. Shaughnessy

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1949

Infiltration into the Motion Pic- ture Industry” conducted in Washington in October, 1947, by the Committee, a member of the Committee urged the Motion Picture Producers Association “to concern itself with cleaning … Chaffee, pp. 360-361. ( Em- phasis added. ) A hundred and fifty years ago in a period of history remarkably similar to the present in its fear of ideas and its justification for their suppression,

Amicus Curiae Brief — Union Security Life Insurance v. Crocker

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1996

If the insured debtor dies within the contestability pe- riod of one year that is permitted under Alabama law,” 2 The contestability period is the period of time during which the insurance company may … Crocker had died within the one-year contestability period and because the cause of death was a medical condition listed in the Health Statement, Union Security acted in accordance with its policy

Amicus Curiae Brief — Golden Gate Restaurant Ass'n v. City & County of San Francisco

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2010

Delta Air Lines, Inc., 463 U.S. 85 € FRI ac ca. ncncvscnsecc su sdeueesacienepébbaeekeaeeneey sania lane 7 WSB Elec., Inc. v. Curry, 88 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. … Public Health Impacts on the Healthy Families Act: Hearing on H.R. 2460 Before the Comm.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Nike, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1999

* * A Finally in May of 1952 the [House Committee on the Judiciary] reported out a ‘clean’ bill. Charles J. Zinn, Commentary on New Title 35 US. … Act. 3.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Charles Barton, Petitioner v. Texas

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Dec 8, 2022

A journalist seeking comment from an individual on a sensitive matter previously thought secret could embarrass that individual. … product from the act of creation.”)

Amicus Curiae Brief — Colorado Department of State, Petitioner v. Micheal Baca, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Apr 8, 2020

Period dictionaries identify both broad and narrow accepted usages of the terms “elector,” “vote” and “ballot.” … serve as an elector limited to what Article II, Section 1 expressly permits, then states could not impose further, sensible eligibility criteria such as residency, age, competency, party affiliation or a clean