Search for: "United States v. Woods" Results 441 - 460 of 1,191
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2022, 6:56 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The Court of Appeals disagrees and the case returns to the criminal docket.The case is United States v. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 7:00 am by Amy Howe
  The first respondent, Carlos Gutierrez, came to the United States when he was five and became a lawful permanent resident (which, as the name suggests, allows him to stay in the United States as long as he doesn’t get into trouble with the law) when he was nineteen. [read post]
12 Jan 2014, 10:51 am
An example of a general legacy is “I give [pounds] 100 to X”: Wood Estate v. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 8:33 am by David McLain
Recently, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado interpreted a faulty workmanship exclusion in a property insurance policy in The Lodge at Mountain Village Owner Association v. [read post]
19 Nov 2013, 5:33 am by Amy Howe
  But it is a choice the people of Alabama have made, and nothing [in] the Constitution of the United States forbids it. [read post]
27 May 2014, 1:59 pm by Kent Scheidegger
  This statement is unworthy of the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
16 Mar 2017, 7:08 pm
Unquestionably, the status of the United States as the indispensable nation is inextricably linked with the fact that global finance and trade is encapsulated in the rules and institutions dominated by the United States and - as former U.S. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 9:17 am by INFORRM
Following the outcome of Schrems I, Schrems reformulated his complaint to the Irish Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) about data transfers arguing that the United States does not provide adequate protection as United States law requires Facebook Inc. to make the personal data transferred to it available to certain United States authorities, such as the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the data… [read post]
4 Oct 2018, 7:25 pm by Brian Shiffrin
 If there are new instructions or legal principles included in the Court's response, and they are harmful to your case, object, citing this case, and noting that the defense did not have an opportunity to respond to or address those instructions during the trial, and this deprives your client of the rights to due process and a fair trial as protected by the New York State and United States constitutions. [read post]