Search for: "State v. Argus "
Results 461 - 480
of 84,700
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Oct 2017, 11:27 am
The post State v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 5:30 pm
Dillon sought the two-level reduction in his base offense level provided in the Amendment and argued that his sentence should be further reduced under United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 5:41 pm
On Friday, Plaintiffs in the long-running court drama GPX Int'l Tire Corp. v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 4:36 pm
On Tuesday, 11/3, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Hemi Group, LLC v. [read post]
14 Dec 2016, 6:38 am
State v. [read post]
3 Sep 2011, 6:27 am
New v. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 8:38 am
State, County, and Municipal Employees, No. 16-1466. [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 3:55 pm
The fate of the case, Al Janko v. [read post]
10 Nov 2010, 8:55 am
The SCOTUS blog case file for Cullen v. [read post]
12 Oct 2014, 5:25 pm
Each state will argue objections to the special master’s report. [read post]
26 Jan 2018, 6:38 am
State v. [read post]
15 Feb 2018, 3:14 am
” In most cases, state courts also didn’t allow women as lawyers to argue cases at the state-court level. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 3:57 am
United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2021, 6:30 am
Ahmad’s position would have understood that he was in custody and would not have felt free to leave as argued by the State, implicating Miranda. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 2:08 pm
In the case, petitioner Manhattan Neighborhood Network (MNN) argued that it is not a state actor and is not required to allow the... [read post]
15 Jul 2016, 6:08 am
The Supreme Court will hear the appeal in R (Johnson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department on 25 and 26 July 2016, where it will be asked to consider a challenge to a deportation order, on the grounds that the appellant ought to have been entitled to automatic British citizenship at birth, and as such should not be deported to Jamaica. [read post]
16 May 2018, 11:21 am
Randolph Institute, Scott Keller argued in Abbott v. [read post]
23 Jun 2013, 9:28 pm
In Alleyne v. [read post]
25 Sep 2014, 10:21 am
” State v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 10:32 am
[Abigail] Moncrieff’s brief argues the petitioner’s interpretation of the statute would render the statute unconstitutional under two principles of federalism: that Congress can't coerce states into implementing federal programs, and that all states must be treated equally.As Koppelman notes below, the same states' rights ideas at the core of the conservative win in NFIB v. [read post]
