Works matching DE "KATZ v. United States"
1
- UMKC Law Review, 2016, v. 85, n. 1, p. 255
- Article
2
- U.C. Davis Law Review, 2012, v. 45, n. 4, p. 1487
- Article
3
- St. John's Law Review, 2016, v. 90, n. 1, p. 207
- Article
5
- Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 2020, v. 43, n. 2, p. 425
- Article
6
- Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice, 2014, v. 34, n. 1, p. 195
- Article
7
- Brigham Young University Law Review, 2013, v. 2013, n. 5, p. 1363
- Article
8
- American Business Law Journal, 1992, v. 29, n. 4, p. 626, doi. 10.1111/j.1744-1714.1991.tb01527.x
- Article
9
- George Mason Law Review, 2020, v. 28, n. 1, p. 1
- Article
10
- American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, 2011, v. 19, n. 4, p. 1327
- Article
11
- Southern Illinois University Law Journal, 2012, v. 36, n. 3, p. 475
- Article
12
- California Western Law Review, 2014, v. 51, n. 1, p. 7
- Article
13
- William & Mary Law Review, 2012, v. 53, n. 5, p. 1797
- Article
14
- University of Chicago Law Review, 2017, v. 84, n. 4, p. 1747
- Kugler, Matthew B.;
- Strahilevitz, Lior Jacob
- Article
16
- Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy, 2020, v. 34, n. 1, p. 421
- Article
17
- Case Western Reserve Law Review, 2014, v. 65, n. 2, p. 413
- Article
18
- Case Western Reserve Law Review, 1991, v. 41, n. 2, p. 581
- Article
19
- Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 2015, v. 27, n. 2, p. 263
- Article
20
- Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2011, v. 26, n. 2, p. 979
- Determann, Lothar;
- Sprague, Robert
- Article
21
- Stanford Technology Law Review, 2008, n. 2, p. 1
- Article
22
- Fordham Urban Law Journal, 2017, v. 44, n. 3, p. 767
- Article
23
- Tennessee Law Review, 2015, v. 82, n. 4, p. 937
- Article
24
- Minnesota Law Review, 2019, v. 104, n. 2, p. 741
- Article
25
- Minnesota Law Review, 2019, v. 104, n. 1, p. 101
- Logan, Wayne A.;
- Linford, Jake
- Article
26
- Minnesota Law Review, 2012, v. 97, n. 1, p. 337
- Article
27
- Yale Law Journal, 2018, v. 127, n. 3, p. 570
- Article
28
- Yale Law Journal, 2016, v. 125, n. 4, p. 946
- Article
29
- Journal of the Missouri Bar, 2013, v. 69, n. 6, p. 336
- Article
30
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 2022, v. 55, n. 4, p. 1053
- Article
31
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 2014, v. 47, n. 2, p. 451
- Article
32
- Cleveland State Law Review, 2018, v. 66, n. 2, p. 443
- Article
33
- South Carolina Law Review, 2014, v. 65, n. 4, p. 709
- Article
34
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 2022, v. 40, n. 1, p. 175
- Article
35
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 2017, v. 35, n. 3, p. 707
- Article
36
- Brooklyn Law Review, 2017, v. 82, n. 3, p. 1377
- Article
37
- New England Law Review, 2013, v. 47, n. 3, p. 773
- Article
38
- Boston University Law Review, 2018, v. 98, n. 5, p. 1277
- Article
39
- Boston University Law Review, 2017, v. 97, n. 3, p. 685
- CASSELL, PAUL G.;
- FOWLES, RICHARD
- Article
40
- New York Law School Law Review, 2020, v. 65, n. 2, p. 259
- Article
41
- Widener Law Review, 2020, v. 26, n. 2, p. 241
- Article
42
- Missouri Law Review, 2017, v. 82, n. 2, p. 483
- Article
43
- Missouri Law Review, 2014, v. 79, n. 3, p. 755
- Article
44
- Washington Law Review, 2018, v. 93, n. 4, p. 1961
- Article
45
- Texas Law Review, 2004, v. 82, n. 6, p. 1349
- Article
46
- 2014
- Lamparello, Adam;
- MacLean, Charles
- Essay
47
- California Law Review, 1987, v. 75, n. 5, p. 1767, doi. 10.2307/3480491
- Article
48
- St. Louis University Law Journal, 2017, v. 61, n. 2, p. 351
- Article
49
- St. Louis University Law Journal, 2016, v. 60, n. 3, p. 391
- Article
50
- Roger Williams University Law Review, 2017, v. 22, n. 1, p. 297
- Article