Search results
Results from the Health.Zone Content Network
Lanham Act. Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B. V., 591 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the trademarkability of a generic terms appended with a top-level domain (TLD) specifier (in this case "Booking.com"). The Court ruled that such names can be trademarked unless the existing combination of term ...
Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 (1970), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the removal of an unruly criminal defendant during his trial. In its decision, the court ruled that a trial judge may remove a stubbornly defiant defendant from the courtroom, following a warning from the judge that he will be removed if his disruptive behavior continues.
Common law: Self-defense. Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529 (1900), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an individual had the right to use force to resist an unlawful arrest and was entitled to a jury instruction to that effect. In 1899, a tribal police officer, John Bad Elk, shot and killed another tribal ...
Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957), along with its companion case Alberts v. California, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which redefined the constitutional test for determining what constitutes obscene material unprotected by the First Amendment. [1]
Case history; Prior: State v. Fiske, 117 Kan. 69, 230 P. 88 (1924): Holding; That there being no charge or evidence that the organization advocated any crime, violence, or other unlawful acts or methods as a means of effecting industrial or political changes or revolution, thus applied, the statute is a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. P. 274 U.S. 386.
Overruled by. Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. (2005) Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the test for determining whether a zoning ordinance or governmental regulation will be considered a taking is whether such action “substantially advances” a legitimate state ...
Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Addyston Pipe and Steel Co. v. United States, 175 U.S. 211 (1899), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that for a restraint of trade to be lawful, it must be ancillary to the main purpose of a lawful contract. A naked restraint on trade is unlawful; it is not a defense that the restraint ...
U.S. Const. amend. United States v. Ball, 163 U.S. 662 (1896), is one of the earliest United States Supreme Court cases interpreting the Double Jeopardy Clause . In 1889, defendants Millard Fillmore Ball, John C. Ball, and Robert E. Boutwell were indicted for the murder of William T. Box. The jury acquitted Millard Fillmore Ball and convicted ...