Search for: "Canadian Pacific Railway Limited"
Results 21 - 33
of 33
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2012, 2:45 pm
kea Marie Comiskey (University of Michigan): Testing the Comprehensibility of Canadian Jury Instructions and the Efficacy of 3 Comprehension Aids Shari S. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 9:30 pm
The Canadian Pacific Railway, which owned the line, claimed the regulation amounted to a taking of its property for which the city should pay compensation. [read post]
27 Feb 2010, 9:59 pm
, Canadian National Railway Co. v. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 4:44 am
Buckley, 521 U.S. 424, 441-44 (1997); see Norfolk & Western Railway. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 5:54 am
Canadian Pacific Railway, No. 07-4621 (D. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 5:54 am
Canadian Pacific Railway, No. 07-4621 (D. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 5:54 am
Canadian Pacific Railway, No. 07-4621 (D. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 8:56 pm
Issues raised in our current list include district courts’ ability to amend incorrect sentences, the constitutionality of appointments to a patent appeals board, the validity of the “automatic companion” rule under the Fourth Amendment, the statute of limitations in securities fraud claims, whether state criminal convictions require jury unanimity, and many (many, many) others. [read post]
19 Jul 2008, 11:07 am
In January, 2002, a freight train operated by Canadian Pacific Railway Co. derailed in North Dakota, releasing a cloud of anhydrous ammonia. [read post]
2 Jan 2008, 12:03 pm
In Canadian Pacific Railway v. [read post]
16 Oct 2007, 10:00 pm
Last month the Alberta Court of Appeal upheld the certification of a class action against the Canadian Pacific Railway Limited relating to TCE contamination. [read post]
13 Sep 2007, 6:07 am
Also, Canadian Pacific Railway Limited has agreed to acquire Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation, the largest regional railroad in the U.S., and its subsidiaries for $1.48 billion. [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 7:04 am
Canadian Pacific Railway (06-528), seeking clarification of when a federal law that does not itself authorize a lawsuit to enforce it can be the basis for preempting any state law on the same subject. [read post]
