Search for: "The United States, Petitioner"
Results 3961 - 3980
of 8,962
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Feb 2016, 8:57 am
The Clean Water Rule is intended to clarify the scope of "the waters of the United States" [WOTUS] subject to protection under the Clean Water Act. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 6:32 am
Pollak, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of New York, considered the issue of whether a plaintiff could serve process upon the defendant via Facebook and email. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 12:41 pm
Petitioners include thirty States, State agencies, and local government entities and more than one hundred private companies, cooperatives, and industry trade groups. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 12:41 pm
Petitioners include thirty States, State agencies, and local government entities and more than one hundred private companies, cooperatives, and industry trade groups. [read post]
20 Feb 2016, 9:50 pm
Accordingly, the state Supreme Court’s decision was affirmed as modified. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 10:53 am
Once the mandate issues, the case will be ripe for a possible petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 9:30 pm
United States (1997) Justice Stevens thinks it is enough that respondent will be gratified by seeing petitioner punished for its infractions and that the punishment will deter the risk of future harm. . . . [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 3:43 pm
On January 25, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Musacchio v.United States. [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 2:28 pm
To be sure, a common response in the context of the war on terrorism is that non-citizens held outside the United States lack rights under either provision, but in neither set of comments did Justice Scalia seem to be limiting his focus to such suspects. [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 7:28 am
Lane; and (2) whether the United States Supreme Court has jurisdiction over a state court determination of retroactivity of a case on collateral review, when a state has both adopted and applied Teague. [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 9:21 pm
Lastly, the court found the fourth provision exceeded authority because municipalities cannot strip constitutional rights from entities and cannot undo decisions of the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
13 Feb 2016, 8:17 pm
What the Section does require is that any petitioner or complainant must be advised of certain procedures. [read post]
13 Feb 2016, 6:00 am
Form of Adoption Legal Status of Petitioner Allowed in North Carolina? [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 8:57 am
Davis, No. 09-99005 (per curiam; panel is Reinhardt, Wardlaw, and Callahan) --- On remand from the United States Supreme Court, see Davis v. [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 12:12 pm
United States, 351 F.3d 1374, 1378 (Fed. [read post]
10 Feb 2016, 1:37 pm
It wrote: 'In our opinion, the intent of Congress, in its adoption of sections 601 Et seq. of title 42 of the United States Code, which set forth the requirements of need and dependency for the Aid to Dependent Children grant which petitioner's children were receiving, was to secure such grants for eligible children, notwithstanding a refusal of the parent to comply with a local agency's demands under section 360 of the Social Services Law'. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 1:37 pm
It wrote: 'In our opinion, the intent of Congress, in its adoption of sections 601 Et seq. of title 42 of the United States Code, which set forth the requirements of need and dependency for the Aid to Dependent Children grant which petitioner's children were receiving, was to secure such grants for eligible children, notwithstanding a refusal of the parent to comply with a local agency's demands under section 360 of the Social Services Law'. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 12:17 pm
Her claim is that sentencing counsel was ineffective for failing to present mitigating evidence -- a claim that is subject to AEDPA's limitation on relief to state-court decisions that run afoul of "clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 5:00 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 1:23 pm
It noted, quoting the United States Supreme Court in Bell v. [read post]
