Search for: "State of North Carolina v. United States" Results 2021 - 2040 of 2,778
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 May 2011, 10:54 am by Bexis
April 12, 2010) (forum defendant rule not resurrected by post-removal service).North Carolina:  Chace v. [read post]
3 May 2016, 5:14 am by Daniel Schwartz
Well, we’ve seen it become a topic on the presidential campaign trail and in North Carolina. [read post]
13 Dec 2018, 4:54 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which involves an exception to the double jeopardy clause that allows a defendant to be prosecuted for the same crime in both federal and state court, for state-court prosecutions of potential recipients of presidential pardons; in an accompanying essay on his eponymous blog, he discusses the relation between originalism and stare decisis as invoked by Justice Brett Kavanaugh during the Gamble  In an op-ed for The New… [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 8:43 am by John Elwood
United States and Yates v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 8:49 am by Suzanne Ito, ACLU
Wednesday, February 15 Criminal Justice: The United States Sentencing Commission will begin a two day hearing to discuss federal sentencing since the Supreme Court decision in United States v. [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 11:14 am
United States v Harper, Department of Revenue of Montana v Kurth Ranch, Cordero v Lalor, and United States v Ursery settled that a sanction in a "civil" or non-criminal proceeding may constitute punishment for double jeopardy purposes. [read post]
14 May 2015, 7:21 am by Rebecca Tushnet
” Defendant’s parent began using its mark in the US as early as 1911, and defendant/those in privity with it used the mark continuously in Canada and the United States, including New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Florida, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, the Rockies, Texas, and Louisiana. [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 9:45 pm by Law Lady
Medicare Fraud: CLINIC OWNERS GET PRISON FOR STEALING MEDICARE FUNDS, United States v. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 1:42 pm by John Elwood
  North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
13 Jul 2008, 4:50 am
Concluding that a discriminatory effect (not a discriminatory intent) is all that is necessary to trigger the Baldwin test of a significant state interest and no non-discriminatory alternatives available, the Court invalidated North Carolina's apple-grading law.So. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 3:06 am by Amy Howe
North Carolina, in which the Court held that requiring a sex offender to wear a GPS monitor for the rest of his life constitutes a search and sent the case back to the state courts. [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
(A discussion of recent decisions eliminating heartbalm actions in North Carolina and West Virginia is available here.) [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 4:00 am by Brian Clarke
  Further, according to a two-year study completed in 1997, suicide accounted for 10.8% of all deaths among lawyers in the United States and Canada and was the third leading cause of death. [read post]
3 Jun 2016, 6:13 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Prolacto primarily does business in the United States through licensing agreements with individual paleterias in Florida, Texas, Northern California, and North Carolina. [read post]
8 Dec 2021, 1:54 pm by Hanna May
CMS stated in the memorandum that it has appealed both decisions, the State of Missouri, et al. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2018, 4:33 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which involves how to determine the precedential effect of Supreme Court decisions with no majority opinion, for this blog. [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 6:33 am by Hans von Spakovsky
The covered jurisdictions are nine entire states – Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia – as well as parts of seven other states (in California, Florida, New York, North Carolina, Michigan, and New Hampshire). [read post]
30 Nov 2018, 4:09 am by Florian Mueller
It's in stark contrast to what the firm's founder, John Quinn, told Judge Lucy Koh of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California at a 2014 Apple v. [read post]