Search for: "United States v. Louis Means" Results 261 - 280 of 463
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Oct 2014, 3:00 am by Ben
Napoleon Crossing the Alps, Jacques-Louis David (1805)"Napoleon's conquest of Italy led to a copyright-fuelled opera boom" - well that caught my eye! [read post]
18 Oct 2014, 3:37 am by SHG
S. 378, 384 (1987); United States v. [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 3:00 am by Michael Lumer
Ultimately, the detectives were convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York of various crimes, and their conviction was affirmed in 2008.The actions were consolidated and assigned to the Hon. [read post]
18 Aug 2014, 5:26 am
After Louis Colon–Gentile was charged “in a seven-count indictment with distribution, receipt, and possession of child pornography, in violation of Title 18, United States Code §§ 2252(a)(2), 2252(a)(4)(B), 2252(b)(1) and  2252(b)(2)”, he moved to suppress “physical evidence and statements he made, on the ground that they were obtained in violation of the 4th Amendment. [read post]
26 Jul 2014, 10:00 pm by Dan Flynn
But with the case of the United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:55 am
June. 13, 2013), holding essentially that, since those meanies on the United States Supreme Court aren’t letting plaintiffs sue generic manufacturers, we’ll change Alabama common law and let them sue someone else. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 10:02 pm by Dan Flynn
United States) giving prosecutors “broad latitude” to present evidence in a criminal trial. [read post]
20 Mar 2014, 5:19 am by Mark Graber
United States (1926), but they never acknowledge that the Brandeis dissent was rooted in a commitment to participatory democracy that Reynolds did not share. [read post]
10 Mar 2014, 5:02 am by Terry Hart
For example, following the district court’s decision in United Artists Television v. [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 12:00 am
The legal brief states that a religious exemption for Hobby Lobby would mean that “business owner[s] in the United States will be empowered to reject insurance coverage for contraception or any other medical prescription, procedure, treatment, or health service it finds religiously objectionable. [read post]