Search for: "United States v. Manning"
Results 2581 - 2600
of 6,304
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 May 2013, 6:05 pm
The case is Dos Santos v. [read post]
29 Apr 2017, 10:47 am
The court cited the Supreme court’s opinion in Rodriguez v United States which states as a general matter a traffic stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made is a violation of the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures. [read post]
29 Apr 2017, 10:47 am
The court cited the Supreme court’s opinion in Rodriguez v United States which states as a general matter a traffic stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made is a violation of the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 8:36 am
United States. [read post]
27 Oct 2014, 1:23 pm
See United States v. [read post]
5 Feb 2017, 12:59 pm
”)United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2014, 9:21 am
United States v. [read post]
19 Jul 2021, 6:30 am
The defendant was convicted at trial, and the Court of Appeals affirms.The case is United States v. [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 10:44 am
Do "navigable waters of the United States" include only "naturally occurring" bodies of water so that construction of engineered channels or other man-made improvements to a river as part of municipal flood and storm control renders the improved portion no longer a "navigable water" under the Clean Water Act? [read post]
22 Nov 2020, 4:20 pm
United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2007, 7:34 am
Monday, Dec. 3 Sprint/United Management v. [read post]
11 Feb 2010, 12:29 pm
And if a judge’s personal characteristics were relevant, why shouldn’t the six current United States Supreme Court justices who are Catholics be excluded from ruling on a case about the religious freedom of Catholics? [read post]
29 May 2012, 10:28 am
First, in McCulloch v. [read post]
11 Jan 2013, 10:40 am
Prior to around the 1970s, no state law defined marriage as between a man and a woman. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that planning authorities could… [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that planning authorities could… [read post]
10 Aug 2012, 4:35 am
" Again, the court found that only a rational basis is required and that one exists here.In a dissent, Justice Burke wrote that the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in United States v. [read post]
8 May 2014, 6:05 am
” In her column for The Washington Post, Ruth Marcus similarly decries the ruling, contending that, although the United States is “a predominantly Christian nation,” “we live here, too — we are Americans, too — and the Constitution, which prohibits elevating one religion over another, demands some sensitivity to this fact. [read post]
3 Sep 2009, 9:07 pm
Sachs, Bill Sjostrom, Marc Steinberg, Ahmed Taha, Steven Thel, Randall Thomas, and Manning Warren.) [read post]
30 Jul 2007, 3:56 am
United States v. [read post]
