Search for: "United States v. Breyer"
Results 3041 - 3060
of 3,533
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Mar 2010, 5:49 am
The United States Supreme Court has sped up the clock in criminal cases with consequences for how attorneys practicing federal criminal law will practice in the future. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 1:46 pm
United States. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 4:09 pm
In his dissent in Free Enterprise Fund v. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 7:07 am
United States [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 3:01 pm
Supreme Court heard arguments on Wednesday in the case of Samantar v. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 9:02 am
Supreme Court heard arguments on Wednesday in the case of Samantar v. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 6:25 pm
Arguing on behalf of the United States as an amicus in support of the petitioners, Assistant to the Solicitor General Pratik Shah reiterated that the plain terms of Section 233(a) are broad enough to preclude Bivens actions even if Congress did not specifically contemplate such actions. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 3:02 pm
Arguing on behalf of the state, Michigan Solicitor General Eric Restuccia began by emphasizing the Court’s decision in North Carolina v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 7:36 am
United States No. 08-103, Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 7:20 am
United States. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 6:45 am
United States. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 1:05 pm
One v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 8:58 am
Check the United States v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 3:32 am
Friend, the United States Supreme Court addressed the confusion among state courts regarding the appropriate standard to establish a corporate or company defendant's place of business in a diversity case. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 12:29 pm
At oral argument in United States v. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 6:52 am
On February 23, 2010, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Hertz v. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 5:12 pm
Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a court can award to a party who prevails in an action against the United States the “fees and other expenses…incurred by” that party if the position of the United States was not “substantially justified. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 9:31 am
Friend, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously agreed that a corporations “principal place of business,” for purposes of determining whether federal courts have diversity jurisdiction (that is, all parties on one side of the versus (“v”) sign are from states different from all parties on the opposite side) to hear a case. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 6:52 am
Arguing on behalf of the United States, Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal made the government’s position clear: the City violated Title VII each time it made a hiring decision based on an improper classification. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 5:30 am
” Bank of United States v. [read post]
