Search for: "Petite v. United States"
Results 4301 - 4320
of 13,645
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Sep 2023, 12:37 pm
United States, Miller asks the justices to grant review and reverse the D.C. [read post]
2 Jun 2020, 11:12 am
” Gunn v. [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 2:07 pm
United States, Aiello v. [read post]
29 Aug 2007, 9:04 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2021, 5:48 pm
These and other petitions of the week are below: Rojas v. [read post]
15 May 2017, 4:41 am
Briefly: In The New York Times, Adam Liptak looks at Gill v. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 11:03 am
The court held that the challenged arbitration process established by the arbitration agreement provided Guyden with an adequate opportunity to enforce her statutory rights.This ruling is consistent with the holding of New York's Court of Appeals in Antinore v State [40 NY2d 6]. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 8:34 am
In United States v. [read post]
1 Aug 2016, 7:22 am
Supreme Court Bulletin http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/sct/2015-2016update.html Petition for certiorari was filed on 7/7/16 in Kelsey v. [read post]
23 Jun 2019, 5:51 pm
The taxpayer in this case filed her petition to the United States Tax Court in 2009 and the taxes were first assessed in 2007, and she did so pro se – without counsel (at least not on record). [read post]
7 Oct 2009, 3:47 am
United States, 555 F.3d 1234 (10th Cir. [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 6:42 pm
Jude Medical, Cardiology Div., Inc. v. [read post]
13 Nov 2015, 11:35 am
As to The Medicines Company v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 5:08 pm
By Dennis Crouch In 1931, the United States Supreme Court decided a landmark case on the patentability of inventions, De Forest Radio Co. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 9:25 am
As recently as December of 2016, the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reiterated this legal tenet in United States v. [read post]
17 Jan 2007, 3:31 pm
United States, 546 U.S. 12 (2005), that Fed. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 6:34 am
United States, 10-7515, for United States v. [read post]
5 Jan 2021, 5:19 pm
SWRCB adopted the Procedures in April 2019 to supplement state-perceived gaps in federal Clean Water Act regulation for proposed discharges of dredged or fill material to broadly defined “waters of the state,” including all wetlands within California – not just wetlands considered “Waters of the United States. [read post]
5 Sep 2007, 6:00 am
Clancy v. [read post]
