Search for: "Pointer v. United States"
Results 221 - 240
of 327
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Nov 2013, 9:37 pm
V. [read post]
12 Apr 2016, 6:08 pm
Thanks to Tim White for the pointer. [read post]
12 Apr 2018, 1:14 pm
United States, No. 18-92C (2018) involved a VA solicitation for a roof replacement at the VA Medical Center in Northport, New York. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 11:41 am
Personnel records allowed me to establish that Onondaga Pottery had hired a young scientist, Edward Schramm, in the 1930’s, from the United States Bureau of Standards. [read post]
15 Jul 2018, 10:47 am
Daniel Mitchell for the pointer. [read post]
17 Dec 2019, 3:35 am
” United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 3:09 pm
Lawmakers’ content- or viewpoint-based intentions generally don’t invalidate facially content-neutral speech-restrictive laws, see United States v. [read post]
9 May 2012, 11:21 am
(Eugene Volokh) In R. v. [read post]
29 May 2012, 1:59 pm
District Court (also in Maryland, as it happens) threw out the indictment in United States v. [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 10:02 am
Pointer goes to . . . [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 3:25 am
Blanchard, et al. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 3:25 am
Blanchard, et al. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 8:33 am
See Duren; State v. [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 8:33 am
See Duren; State v. [read post]
[Eugene Volokh] A Lawyer's Filing "Is Replete with Citations to Non-Existent Cases"—Thanks, ChatGPT?
26 May 2023, 10:46 pm
In support of his position that there was tolling of the statute of limitation under the Montreal Convention by reason of a bankruptcy stay, the plaintiff's submission leads off with a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Varghese v China South Airlines Ltd, 925 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 2019). [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 1:02 am
The majority further held that the Federal Circuit decisions were not binding on the Texas state court, reasoning that a Texas state court was only obligated to follow higher Texas courts and the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
7 Sep 2018, 3:00 am
Here’s an excerpt: The Second Circuit ruled on August 24 in United States v. [read post]
27 Sep 2021, 11:42 am
From today's decision in City of Newark v. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 3:44 pm
(Rees v United Kingdom, para 49; Sheffield and Horsham v United Kingdom, para 66; see also Cossey v United Kingdom, paras 43, 46; I v United Kingdom (GC), para 78; Jaremowicz v Poland, para 48 ('right of a man and a woman to marry')) The historical analysis of the original intent behind Article 12 doesn't help. [read post]
