Search for: "The Active v. United States"
Results 481 - 500
of 18,186
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Mar 2013, 12:43 pm
See Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 2427. [read post]
25 Sep 2007, 9:50 am
In United States v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 12:14 pm
See Karkkainen v. [read post]
29 Oct 2009, 11:11 pm
V. [read post]
26 Sep 2017, 6:41 am
Origin of the Ohio CAT Ohio’s Commercial Activity Tax is imposed at a rate of 2.6 mills (0.26 percent) on business gross receipts in excess of $1 million. [read post]
16 May 2018, 11:21 am
Florida has had several terms when it was the most active state of the four before the Supreme Court. [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 5:17 pm
He is not the president of the United States. [read post]
U.S. Supreme Court Discusses Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act as It Applies to Personal Injury Cases
7 Dec 2015, 9:53 am
Here, the Court noted, the only commercial activity that took place in the United States was the sale of the Eurorail pass to the plaintiff. [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 8:15 am
They sued the United States in Federal Court. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 3:59 pm
IBP v. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 5:09 pm
United States (Arizona's likely appeal to the Supreme Court of United States v. [read post]
21 Jan 2019, 7:41 am
United States v. [read post]
25 Mar 2010, 8:52 am
In United States v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 8:41 am
She entered the United States on September 27, 2013. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 11:08 am
The United States Supreme Court recently handed down its decision in Kentucky v. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 2:54 pm
Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in United States v. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 10:37 am
Lumpkin On May 31, 2016, the US Supreme Court ruled in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
16 Jun 2020, 5:14 am
” By the time of the phone call, more than 20 states had activated their National Guard contingents. [read post]
25 Mar 2009, 3:00 pm
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit grants rehearing en banc in United States v. [read post]
7 Mar 2021, 7:01 am
It agreed with the District Court’s conclusion that Appellant met her burden of showing L.S. was well-settled in the United States. [read post]