Search for: "Kent v. United States"
Results 241 - 260
of 779
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Sep 2009, 6:19 am
" One of the petitions considered on Tuesday addresses the issue of whether federal judges have the power to release detainees into the United States. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 12:45 pm
United States and Black v. [read post]
4 Nov 2021, 12:00 am
For example, in Dynatec Mining Ltd. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 11:37 am
Hawkins v. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 7:44 am
” In the wake of the Court’s recent decision in United States v. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 10:46 am
"[A]ll such proceedings for the enforcement, or to restrain violations, of this chapter shall be by and in the name of the United States. [read post]
25 Jun 2021, 6:30 am
See Dobbs v. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 7:41 pm
Kent State Univ., 212 F.3d1272, 1282 (Fed. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 8:13 am
United States and argues that “[w]hat’s at stake in this case is whether the justices will… make it easier for prosecutors to pursue certain types of insider trading claims. [read post]
8 Jan 2010, 10:54 pm
Kent, 531 F.3d 642, 648-49 (8th Cir. 2008); United States v. [read post]
17 Jan 2021, 6:15 pm
Twitter has received a lot of public attention recently, most notably for banning the President of the United States from using the platform. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 10:19 am
United States (1969), a landmark case in the U.S. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 11:17 am
United States (1969), a landmark case in the U.S. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 2:39 pm
United States (1969), a landmark case involving probable cause affidavits for search warrants. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 2:39 pm
United States (1969), a landmark case involving probable cause affidavits for search warrants. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 11:17 am
United States (1969), a landmark case in the U.S. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 10:19 am
United States (1969), a landmark case in the U.S. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 3:45 am
United States and Yates v. [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am
In support of its argument that NJT was an "arm of the state" entitled to invoke sovereign immunity, defendants cited a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit holding that NJT is entitled to invoke sovereign immunity in federal court (see Karns v Shanahan, 879 F3d 504, 519 [3d Cir 2018]). [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am
In support of its argument that NJT was an "arm of the state" entitled to invoke sovereign immunity, defendants cited a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit holding that NJT is entitled to invoke sovereign immunity in federal court (see Karns v Shanahan, 879 F3d 504, 519 [3d Cir 2018]). [read post]
