Search for: "MILLER v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA"
Results 141 - 160
of 283
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
To date, the legislatures of ten states and the District of Columbia—which collectively account for 165 electoral college votes, well more than half of the 270 needed for the NPV bill to become effective—have passed laws to adopt the measure. [read post]
8 May 2015, 9:18 am
Because both ask whether Miller v. [read post]
1 May 2015, 9:19 am
Petitioners contend that the ordinance violates the Second Amendment as interpreted in District of Columbia v. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am
The first edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [Manual] was published in 1994, a year after the Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Daubert. [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 8:50 am
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that they couldn’t, finding that it was a violation of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (also known as the McCain–Feingold Act). [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 6:44 am
By Ronald Miller, J.D. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 2:19 pm
Grosz v. [read post]
30 Dec 2014, 6:47 am
Sec. 552.109, scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2015, was vacated in a ruling by a federal district court in the District of Columbia. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 11:05 am
District Court for the District of Columbia to entertain a challenge to a determination by the U.S. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 1:28 pm
” Sorrell v. [read post]
9 Nov 2014, 6:46 pm
The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri ruled that the Guidelines were constitutional. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
Ellis v. [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 12:29 am
Brands, LLC v. [read post]
10 Sep 2014, 7:58 am
By Ronald Miller, J.D. [read post]
19 Aug 2014, 12:57 pm
District Court for the District of Columbia that Ethiopia must be held accountable for its illegal wiretapping of an American citizen. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 1:04 am
District of Columbia. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 9:16 am
Sebelius et al, was originally filed in the District Of Columbia District Court by twelve plaintiffs, comprised of individuals and companies (“et al” is Latin for “and others”). [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 6:45 am
By Ronald Miller, J.D. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:55 am
Fifth Avenue Chrysler Center, Inc,, 454 P.2d 244, 247 (Alaska 1969).ArizonaNo Arizona court has directly passed on innovator liability, but the federal district court in the Darvocetlitigation twice held that the theory was incompatible with Arizona law. [read post]
