Search for: "State of California v. United States"
Results 3241 - 3260
of 13,839
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
Rosenbaum, Amanda Mangaser Savage, Kathryn Eidmann and Sarah Camiscoli of the bar of the State of the State of LA, California, of counsel), for appellants.Letitia James, Attorney General, New York (Mark S. [read post]
8 May 2024, 6:00 am
Rosenbaum, Amanda Mangaser Savage, Kathryn Eidmann and Sarah Camiscoli of the bar of the State of the State of LA, California, of counsel), for appellants.Letitia James, Attorney General, New York (Mark S. [read post]
7 Aug 2024, 1:57 pm
H.R.9310 - To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide Tribal courts and law enforcement with more tools to combat the opioid epidemic. [read post]
26 Aug 2019, 4:17 pm
The case, Barr v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 4:47 pm
Harris v. [read post]
24 Oct 2016, 2:06 pm
Thompson and State V. [read post]
5 Feb 2015, 11:20 am
In 1986, the United States Supreme Court opined in Meritor Savings Bank v. [read post]
26 May 2011, 7:09 am
The Northern District of California had found U.S. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 1:32 am
Judge William Alsup stated the United States Supreme Court 'has not yet made a clear ruling that admission of irrelevant or overtly prejudicial evidence constitutes a due process violation sufficient to warrant issuance of the writ.' Holley v. [read post]
Interpreting plant provisions of the ESA, 9th Circuit shows restraint, encourages FWS to adopt rules
31 Aug 2010, 5:01 pm
Northern California River Watch v, Wilcox, No. 08-15780,(August 25, 2010)(Dorothy W. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 10:36 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Feb 2015, 9:30 pm
Taken together, the chapters trace the narrative arc of school desegregation in the United States, beginning in California in the 1940s, continuing through Brown v. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 7:32 am
Yesterday, in United States v. [read post]
12 Jan 2007, 4:10 am
United States v. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 5:12 am
Such a statute could read: No state or locality may rely upon the new constitutional standard for substantial nexus articulated by the United States Supreme Court in South Dakota v. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 6:12 am
Approximately 120 United States citizens were on board and two may still be missing. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 6:12 am
Approximately 120 United States citizens were on board and two may still be missing. [read post]
13 Jun 2009, 5:48 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 7:30 am
United States, and Radice v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 6:33 am
California and United States v. [read post]
