Search for: "High v. Army"
Results 241 - 260
of 851
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Apr 2018, 3:11 am
In Baker v. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 3:28 pm
If the answer is the UN or NATO, neither of those groups are "High Contracting parties" to the Geneva Conventions. [read post]
2 Aug 2023, 9:33 pm
Sissel v. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 7:18 am
Jacobs reports that the Court “may decide as soon as Monday to review a high-profile case on whether an Army Corps of Engineers determination that property qualifies for Clean Water Act protections can be challenged in court. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 11:57 am
Leon informed the plaintiffs in Klayman v. [read post]
13 Sep 2008, 12:42 am
Center for Biological Diversity v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 4:59 am
Indeed, the Sixth Circuit specifically held as much in a well-known 1992 case, United States v. [read post]
15 Nov 2019, 6:30 am
What is distinctive about McCulloch v. [read post]
5 Aug 2008, 9:20 pm
It may even be absurd for a high school, although the 9th Circuit in the Harper v. [read post]
18 Jan 2021, 8:15 am
If some colonel or general controls, or if gangs, criminal groups, death squads, private armies, or internal army factions compete for control, what does liberty mean? [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 6:09 am
In their landmark 2008 case, District of Columbia v. [read post]
29 Oct 2017, 1:19 pm
SWANNCC v. [read post]
6 Sep 2014, 6:55 am
Later on Tuesday, Kerr summarized the CA2 ACLU v. [read post]
4 Jun 2020, 4:48 pm
Trapped into an army routine, Stella Melville draws a quivering breath and says “I hate the army! [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 1:27 pm
Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 1:27 pm
Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
11 Jun 2011, 6:27 pm
ARMY 20090234, a high-profile case that presents an important question about the government’s obligation to disclose a potentially exculpatory expert opinion to the defense. [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 4:07 am
Army Air Force (USAAF). [read post]
21 Jul 2022, 5:01 am
" Consider, for instance, United States v. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 2:57 pm
In Dukes v. [read post]
