Search for: "United States v. Classic"
Results 181 - 200
of 1,534
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 May 2018, 7:19 pm
Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter in a concurring opinion of United States v. [read post]
8 Oct 2012, 9:30 am
United States, 264 U.S. 146 (1924). [read post]
11 Jul 2018, 11:58 am
United States Telecom Ass'n v. [read post]
18 Apr 2008, 11:07 am
The United States Attorney denied the accusation. [read post]
11 May 2008, 9:17 am
United States v. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 5:54 am
AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge.TO: THE HONORABLE LEE YEAKEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGEBefore this Court are Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 5:54 am
AUSTIN, Magistrate Judge.TO: THE HONORABLE LEE YEAKEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGEBefore this Court are Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. [read post]
8 Oct 2017, 1:46 pm
United States v. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
United States, decided in 1878. [read post]
9 May 2014, 12:36 pm
It was held that the tests were made at regularly scheduled intervals, and were classic examples of records made and kept in the regular the police business of maintaining highway safety. [read post]
4 Dec 2022, 5:20 am
NARA v. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 9:07 am
Circuit's opinion in United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 11:49 pm
V. [read post]
15 Apr 2025, 4:30 am
Jackson Women’s Health Organization, in which the United States Supreme Court, overruling Roe v. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 7:45 am
That investigation is also far more complex in the United States than a quick examination of the organization of its government might suggest. [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 9:01 pm
United States, and Davis v. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 2:45 am
" in particular, applicant stated that its "handheld units store inside egg-shaped divider" and that "this device includes two hand-held, egg-shaped probes that are gently pressed to the skin. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 9:12 pm
In Brown Shoe v. [read post]
1 Feb 2018, 7:42 am
United States, 101 F. [read post]
2 Feb 2008, 7:59 am
Plaintiffs claimed violations of the "Public Use Clause" of the Fifth Amendment and the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, along with a New York State law claim. [read post]
