Search for: "United States v. Herring" Results 2801 - 2820 of 23,686
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Aug 2009, 2:29 pm
" ACCA has decided that issue for Estrada, in United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2009, 6:55 am
Last week, The New York Times published an article about the United States Supreme Court ruling in Crawford v. [read post]
12 Aug 2009, 2:29 pm
" ACCA has decided that issue for Estrada, in United States v. [read post]
20 Feb 2011, 1:24 pm by NL
She argued that Article 8 imposed on the State a positive obligation to facilitate the gypsy way of life (Chapman v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 27238/95, BAILII: [2001] ECHR 43, ECHR 2001 I and Connors v. the United Kingdom, no. 66746/01, BAILII: [2004] ECHR 223, 27 May 2004) and in granting such a wide-ranging injunction the authorities were acting in violation of this obligation. 21. [read post]
Contesting the state’s segregationist policy, they took their case (Parker v. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 7:59 am
the smallest saleable patent practising unit (SSPPU) (see Kat friend Richard Vary's comment in the last update here). [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 6:39 pm
After certifying that Benway was acting within the scope of her employment at the time of the action, the United States was be substituted as a defendant in the action. [read post]
26 Feb 2015, 6:30 am by Dan Ernst
The case maintains that although employees cannot be specifically ordered to perform on a contract, they may be enjoined from working for a competitor.This article demonstrates how hostile the Lumley rule was to the American ethos of free labor when it was first introduced in the United States in the mid-nineteenth century. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 2:46 am by Amy Howe
Briefly: In The Huffington Post, Cristian Farias reports that the brief filed by the United States last week in Puerto Rico v. [read post]
26 Apr 2017, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
" However, the Circuit Court dismissed this contention, explaining that such a claim "is not cognizable in a civil case," citing United States v. [read post]