Search for: "United States v. House"
Results 2661 - 2680
of 11,981
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Jun 2014, 9:01 pm
California together with United States v. [read post]
5 Nov 2007, 12:30 pm
As the opinion notes, one provisionexempts from militia duty "the Vice President of the United States, [executive branch officers and judges], Congressmen, custom house officers, . . . post officers, . . . all Ferrymen employed at any ferry on the post road, . . . all pilots, all mariners actually employed in the sea service of any citizen or merchant within the United States; and all persons who now are or may be hereafter exempted by… [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 9:01 pm
For example, in a recent case, McQuistion v. [read post]
13 Dec 2024, 5:04 am
“At least since the Supreme Court’s decision in the 1898 case United States v. [read post]
6 Nov 2019, 6:10 am
As I explain in this article that will appear shortly in Rutgers Law Review, Congress has the authority to count states as ratifying an Article V amendment even when those states subsequently rescinded their ratification. [read post]
6 Apr 2016, 4:00 pm
Hawkins defaults, the house gets sold, story over. [read post]
2 Feb 2012, 12:28 pm
In his opinion for the majority in Jones v. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 8:39 pm
Co., Inc., No. 84, 85 "When a contractor has promised to pay its workers the prevailing wages required by the United States Housing Act, the workers may sue under state law to enforce the promise" ETHICS & DISCIPLINARY CODE, ETHICS & PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, PER CURIAM, SANCTIONS In the Matter of Honorable Robert M. [read post]
3 May 2017, 4:51 am
United States, Town of Chester v. [read post]
28 Jun 2013, 11:05 am
First articulated by the United States Supreme Court in Daubert v. [read post]
7 Mar 2008, 12:56 pm
" United States v. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 9:17 am
MishkinThirteen amicus briefs have been filed in Township of Mount Holly v. [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 12:13 pm
Facts: This case (Peters v. [read post]
26 Apr 2017, 7:23 am
United States Department of Defense, 836 F.3d 57 (D.C. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 9:14 am
In giving the only judgment Lady Hale stated that no enquiries were made to assess the practicability of moving the family to Bletchley or as to the children’s needs, subject to the Children’s Act 2004, s 11(2). [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 7:44 am
The Court relied primarily on a 2012 case, United States v. [read post]
13 May 2011, 5:39 am
United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 4:36 am
” United States v. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 6:33 am
Today in the Community we are discussing Arizona v. [read post]
3 Feb 2010, 7:03 am
The case is styled "Danny Kirk, v. [read post]
