Search for: "Clark v. United States" Results 301 - 320 of 1,489
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 May 2012, 11:38 am by Poppy Weston-Davies, Olswang LLP
The Respondents, who were appointed as receivers of TCT by the High Court of England and Wales, caused TCT to present a voluntary petition for relief in New York under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code and TCT was placed into insolvency proceedings in New York on the basis that (i) nearly all of TCT’s 60,000 creditors were located in Canada or the US; and (ii) TCT as a trust was treated as a separate legal entity under US law. [read post]
26 Feb 2020, 2:21 pm by Unknown
Clark County Sheriff's Office (Indian Gaming)Tribal Courts Bulletin https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/tribal/2020.htmlPicard v. [read post]
23 Apr 2007, 6:27 pm
The parties' briefs are available here; the brief of the United States is available here. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 3:30 pm by John Kroger - Guest
John has devoted his entire life to public service as a United States Marine, federal prosecutor, public policy expert, and teacher. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 12:20 pm by Benjamin Pollard
The United States repatriated Assadullah Haroon Gul, a former Guantanamo Bay detainee, writes the New York Times. [read post]
30 Sep 2011, 11:41 am by Christopher Mathews
  The Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals tackled that somewhat messy issue with its recent decision and order in United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2008, 5:32 am
Clark County, No. 05-16173 (July 23, 2007), a decision I blogged about here. [read post]
24 Oct 2007, 12:05 pm
It was only the second case in history, after United States v. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 5:26 am by INFORRM
Facts The respondent, Gary Flood, was a Detective Sergeant with the Metropolitan Police Service’s Extradition Unit. [read post]
19 Oct 2017, 4:02 am by Edith Roberts
” In an op-ed for The New York Times, Jennifer Daskal explains why the court’s recent decision to review digital-privacy case United States v. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 2:11 am by Blog  Editorial
  In relation to control, no material difference as regards the position of the state. 15.07: Thomas de la Mare QC takes the Court through the cases of Barnado and Mallin v Clark. [read post]