Search for: "US v. Elliott"
Results 341 - 360
of 386
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Mar 2019, 8:09 am
The confines of our deliberations in this case are not necessarily to be determined by the manner in which the parties choose to make their presentations to us. [read post]
22 Mar 2025, 8:17 am
– Jack Daniel’s v. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 9:01 pm
The General Perjury Statute (18 USC 1621) has been nicely encapsulated in United States v. [read post]
12 Jul 2018, 5:06 am
” At the Daily Journal (subscription required), David Boyle looks at National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 8:27 am
The case is Banks v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 8:25 am
Babubhai Patel concealed his ownership and control over many of the Patel Pharmacies through the use of straw owners. [read post]
18 Oct 2022, 6:08 am
Supreme Court overturned Roe v. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 9:30 pm
The ANPRM sought comment on whether EPA should implement a more “consistent and transparent” approach to using cost-benefit analysis in regulations. [read post]
4 Dec 2007, 7:06 pm
On Nov. 19, circuit judges Henry Lackey, Robert Elliott and Andrew Howorth all told the state Supreme Court they would "awate" the appointment of a special judge to take on the case, Jones v. [read post]
25 Oct 2022, 10:46 am
Elliott. [read post]
7 Nov 2022, 7:19 am
Rev. 56, 63–66 (2015) (suggesting after King v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 11:19 am
(Sierra Club, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Oct 2011, 3:30 pm
This investigation previously led to the October 2008 indictments of Testwell Laboratories and its top executives, V. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 5:36 am
This duo gives us a solid overview of the MQD’s triggers that is increasingly being picked up by advocates and academics. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 1:30 am
There is a long and detailed analysis of the Bill by Mark Elliott, Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at Cambridge, here. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 2:40 pm
As the Supreme Court recognized in the Reno v. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 2:16 pm
(Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2023, 8:32 am
The test in Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v. [read post]
27 Jul 2014, 9:03 am
The constitutionality of having scientists, or specially qualified judges, serve as fact finders has never been clearly addressed.[6] Other commentators have argued in favor of the existing set of judicial tools, such as appointment of testifying “neutral” expert witnesses and scientific advisors for trial judges.[7] These approaches have been generally available in federal and some state trial courts, but they have rarely been used. [read post]
9 Oct 2007, 8:14 am
(Id. at 260, citing Godfrey v. [read post]
