Search for: "STATE v. STEVENS" Results 4701 - 4720 of 7,829
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Mar 2011, 1:35 pm by WIMS
At issue is an order of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denying summary judgment on all claims by Appellants, who are former general category scallop permit holders, while granting summary judgment on all claims to Appellees Gary Locke, in his capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 1:27 pm by Eugene Volokh
Full protection, except for historically recognized exceptions: The Court’s decision last year in Stevens v. [read post]
19 Mar 2011, 1:17 pm by Steve Kalar
A slow week in the Ninth (for non-capital cases, at least), and an order amending the opinion, gives us an excuse to go back for a second pass at the interesting decision and sentencing issues in United States v. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 4:50 pm by Steve Lombardi
As previously discussed, we have never held this to be the law in this state. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 1:42 pm by Lyle Denniston
  The Court extended that Amendment, and with it, the exclusionary rule, to state and local governments in the 1961 case of Mapp v. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 8:33 am by Eugene Volokh
But it doesn’t at all consider other cases, such as United States v. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 1:27 am by Ben Vernia
Judge Polster reviewed the long history of qui tam actions in the United States, and noted that the Supreme Court, in Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 7:23 am by Moderator
At the launch party, Destiny Real Estate & Sales presented three real estate developments to be constructed in 2007, which will be primarily promoted to the United States market. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 4:31 am by SHG
This comes from the Tennessee Court of Appeals in State v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 6:25 pm
Marine--produced essentially the same lineup as last year's ruling in United States v. [read post]