Search for: "Billings v. Edwards (1979)"
Results 1 - 20
of 35
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 May 2023, 6:37 am
But, the exact contours of the possible tax crimes were not clear—even with Bragg’s response to Trump’s request for a bill of particulars in hand. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 6:50 pm
The critics and cheerleaders of Dr. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 3:23 pm
The New York State 2022-2023 Budget[1] amendment QQ updated the State’s approach to freshwater wetlands regulation. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 9:59 am
Funk v. [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 12:04 pm
See Schulz v. [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 9:05 pm
[Editor’s Note: This post is based on a comment letter submitted to the U.S. [read post]
7 Apr 2021, 12:23 pm
• Bill J. [read post]
9 Sep 2020, 4:01 am
United States, 441 U.S. 238, 248 (1979). [read post]
8 Sep 2020, 4:54 pm
United States, 441 US 238, 247-48 (1979). [read post]
18 Aug 2019, 8:18 pm
John Manley and Bill C-34 (37-2). [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 9:22 am
Selikoff received the Albert Lasker Clinical Medical Research Award for his work on the clinical trial of isoniazid to treat tuberculosis, along with Walsh McDermott and Carl Muschenheim, of the Hoffmann-La Roche Research Laboratories, and Edward H. [read post]
2 May 2018, 11:16 pm
The amendment Bill seeks to alter the legal position which has been in vogue for more than 200 years (see, for instance, Harnett v Yielding (1805)). [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 11:02 am
Board of Education or how we got to Obergefell v. [read post]
6 Dec 2017, 1:19 pm
Edward A. [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 4:00 am
Edwards v. [read post]
25 Dec 2015, 12:08 pm
Five years after we filed Jewel, and responding to further revelations in 2013 by whistleblower Edward Snowden, we filed First Unitarian Church v NSA on behalf of nearly two dozen organizations from across the political spectrum. [read post]
22 Mar 2015, 3:37 pm
The problem was based on United States v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 1:15 pm
Saxe v. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 7:50 am
The DC Circuit has handed down Edwards v. [read post]
15 Mar 2014, 5:12 pm
In Smith v. [read post]
