Search for: "United States v. Weed"
Results 301 - 320
of 383
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jun 2011, 8:33 am
State, 505 So.2d 547 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1987). [read post]
12 May 2011, 6:33 am
In Peviani v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 3:28 am
[United Kingdom] [Habitual Residence] Lakeman v Weed, 2011 WL 824588 (D.Minn.) [read post]
17 Apr 2011, 9:01 pm
United States v. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 9:13 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 10:50 am
Answer: Because of the effect on “further appellate review” – which means the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 5:49 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 9:00 am
V. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 2:55 pm
That has the advantage of creating a direct circuit split over the extent of PMA preemption, and direct circuit splits are one thing upon which successful United States Supreme Court appeals are based.But on TwIqbal, what Bausch is conceptually worse than just disagreeing with a decision we like. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 7:34 am
John Fund, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2010, 8:55 pm
United States, 556 F.3d 1244, 1250 (11th Cir. 2009). [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 11:28 pm
he United States Department of Agriculture ("USDA") justifies the Plant Protection Act ("PPA")(7 U.S.C. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 11:27 pm
he United States Department of Agriculture ("USDA") justifies the Plant Protection Act ("PPA")(7 U.S.C. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 12:09 pm
Everybody has dreads; everybody goes dumb; we pop pills, smoke a lot of weed; parties, sideshows and hos. [read post]
20 Nov 2010, 2:01 am
This ought to assist in weeding out claims which have no real substance. [read post]
11 Nov 2010, 1:09 pm
On Tuesday, November 9, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in TiVo, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 10:36 am
In a dispute with a Japanese rival, Fujitsu, over mainframe computer operating systems, IBM championed copyright protection for software in the United States and around the world. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 9:44 am
For the United States: Edwin S. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 11:25 am
The United States argues that the defendant was the true addressee; hence, why isn't that binding on the government, as an admission that the defendant does have standing? [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 12:39 pm
In Rowe v. [read post]
