Search for: "United States v. Rule" Results 401 - 420 of 50,442
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Feb 2018, 6:01 am by David Wright
The post United States Supreme Court Questions Whether A Rule 23(b)(2) Class Can Challenge the Failure to Provide Noncitizens Bail Hearings appeared first on Class Actions Brief. [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 2:55 pm by Orin Kerr
(Orin Kerr) Some readers have asked me about the oral argument schedule in United States v. [read post]
26 May 2014, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
The landscape changed dramatically, however, in 2013, with the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. [read post]
5 Sep 2014, 3:04 am by Paul Caron
Patricia Cain (Santa Clara), Taxation of Same-Sex Couples After United States v. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 9:39 am
According to a court written summary, Northshore received all of the relief it sought in its motion to dissolve the injunction in the case, and it lacked standing to appeal the order; nor did Northshore have standing to appeal the district court's collateral ruling denying its Rule 60(b) motion as the court's ruling on that motion was immaterial to the ultimate ruling vacating the injunction; the United States' appeal must also be… [read post]
27 Apr 2017, 9:21 am by Ashley Deeks
 The idea that a requesting state (here, Sweden) may only try a person for the specific offense(s) for which the requested state (here, the UK) granted extradition is known as the rule of specialty, and is contained in Article VIII of the Convention. [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 7:33 am by Julie Deisher
The ruling comes just days after the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana [official website] became the first federal court to uphold a state's ban on same-sex marriage [JURIST report] since the Supreme Court's verdict in United States v. [read post]
19 Apr 2022, 12:37 pm by Bernard Bell
United States Citizenship & Immigration Services. 407 F.Supp.3d 311 (D.D.C. 2019); Knight First Amendment Institute v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 3:32 am by Daniel E. Cummins
The Court ruled that a company should be considered a citizen of a state where its “nerve center” is located.Justice Stephen G. [read post]