Search for: "United States v. Mason" Results 221 - 240 of 602
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Apr 2018, 4:11 am by Edith Roberts
Lawyered podcast, Imani Gandy and Jessica Mason Pieklo weigh in on the cert petition currently pending before Supreme Court, Azar v. [read post]
15 Dec 2017, 2:15 am by NCC Staff
Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 12:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
William Wirt, 9th United States Attorney General in officeNovember 13, 1817 – March 4, 1829 In March 1831, Wirt appeared before the Supreme Court on behalf of the Cherokee Nation, in the case known as Cherokee Nation v. [read post]
4 Oct 2017, 4:17 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks whether a guilty plea waives a challenge to the constitutionality of an offense. [read post]
26 Sep 2017, 6:41 am by Dan Carvajal
Ohio is one of only five states with a statewide gross receipts tax, but faced with declining corporate income tax revenues, other states are beginning to look to the Ohio CAT as a model. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 4:14 am by Edith Roberts
” In an op-ed for the Mississippi Business Journal, Ben Williams debunks “recent indistinct and misleading news reports” suggesting that “the Supreme Court of the United States has … asked the State of Mississippi or Governor to defend the battle emblem on the Mississippi flag. [read post]
7 Aug 2017, 3:30 am by Peter Mahler
For example, in one year, certain Regeneron directors “were the highest compensated non-employee directors in the United States. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 11:00 am by Jane Chong
” The Constitution provides that the president, like the vice president and all civil officers of the United States, “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 2:31 pm by The Federalist Society
In an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, the Court held that (1) Lexmark exhausted its patent rights in toner cartridges sold in the United States through its "Return Program"; and (2) Lexmark cannot sue Impression Products for patent infringement with respect to cartridges Lexmark sold abroad, which Impression Products acquired from purchasers and imported into the United States, because an authorized sale outside the United States,… [read post]