Search for: "Little v State"
Results 4621 - 4640
of 26,877
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2016, 6:19 pm
Filburn, Lopez, and United States v. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 4:57 am
In United States v. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 12:34 pm
Commissioner (1989), United States v. [read post]
29 Mar 2016, 1:47 pm
March 24, 2016) the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York has confirmed the significance of last year’s Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Cheeks v. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 10:34 am
Canonical cases like Mapp v. [read post]
16 Jul 2007, 3:19 pm
" Last Thursday, the Third Department in Giblin v Pine Ridge Log Homes, Inc., 2007 NY Slip Op 05992 held for the first time in the State that the loss of one eye does not constitute a "grave injury. [read post]
8 May 2008, 9:07 am
As a practical matter, modification of the consent decree may be bring little comfort as some state attorneys general have taken the position that resale price maintenance is still a per se violation of their antitrust statutes. [read post]
8 Mar 2017, 9:45 am
Based on their comments during oral arguments in Packingham v. [read post]
13 Nov 2013, 9:01 pm
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in Town of Greece v. [read post]
26 Jan 2024, 9:01 am
” South Africa had argued that the imposition of such a requirement would follow the model the Court had used in the provisional measures phase of Ukraine v. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 2:43 am
Davis v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 2:39 pm
Lim v. [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 7:34 am
[In Wooden v. [read post]
27 Aug 2008, 12:20 pm
"Evans v. [read post]
25 Oct 2016, 9:50 am
Microsoft v. [read post]
26 Feb 2014, 5:53 am
In Fernandez v. [read post]
3 May 2013, 10:05 am
Specifically, it states that a “court of the United States”, i.e., a federal court, “shall have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both, at its discretion, such contempt of its authority, and none other, as . . . [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 10:53 am
In Gersh v. [read post]
20 Aug 2024, 8:42 am
The court responds that “the relevant provisions are worded at such a high level of generality that they provide little help to businesses in identifying which of those practices or designs may actually harm children. [read post]
8 Apr 2007, 12:08 pm
I think the Cadence v. [read post]
