Search for: "United States v. Was"
Results 4101 - 4120
of 102,810
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jul 2011, 6:00 am
Pool Offshore, Inc., 182 F.2d 353 (5th Cir. 1999) was still good law in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Stewart v. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 9:17 am
Pape, a seminal case decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1961, holds great historical significance in civil rights litigation against law enforcement. [read post]
6 Apr 2009, 7:02 pm
Justice Souter filed a brief concurrence, printed here in its entirety: I am not through regretting that my position in United States v. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 8:22 am
., United States v. [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 8:18 am
United States is, however, mistaken. [read post]
31 Oct 2016, 8:35 am
Particular regard was given to the case of Soering v United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 439, where it was held that allowing an extradition of a party to the United States would constitute a violation of that person’s Article 3 rights, as he would be exposed to the risk of the application of the death penalty as a direct consequence of the extradition. [read post]
20 Sep 2016, 10:23 am
’ Commonwealth v. [read post]
19 May 2010, 6:48 pm
In Graham v. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 5:16 am
Here are the notices of withdrawal of laches as a defense in United States v. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 12:09 pm
In United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 11:15 am
This week in Other Barks & Bites: Modified Opinion issued in Facebook v. [read post]
13 Mar 2018, 6:37 am
United States, is misplaced. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 9:11 am
" [See United States v. [read post]
10 Mar 2009, 6:33 am
The recent opinion of the Tenth Circuit in United States v. [read post]
16 May 2013, 3:02 am
UNITED STATES. [read post]
24 Jul 2013, 1:38 pm
Appealed from the United States District Court for the District of Alaska. [read post]
14 Nov 2008, 9:50 am
Zalewska v Department for Social Development House of Lords “The United Kingdom's decision to restrict the payment of welfare benefits for nationals of Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, known collectively as the A8 states, to those who had worked an uninterrupted 12 months in employment registered with the Home Office was not incompatible with European Union law. [read post]
1 May 2012, 6:24 am
The United States Supreme Court has granted cert in a case for the purpose of clarifying whether the Court's previous decision in Padilla v. [read post]
31 May 2011, 2:32 pm
In the state court, it was State v. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 10:17 pm
I hadn't noticed until today that the Army Litigation Division lawyer who is "of counsel" for the United States in the Gray v. [read post]
