Search for: "In Re v. United States"
Results 501 - 520
of 17,079
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jul 2013, 9:45 am
The United States appeals, arguing the amount of the penalty is inadequate. [read post]
5 Jul 2014, 10:06 am
In U.S. v. [read post]
2 May 2013, 10:51 am
Petitioner Jeffrey Lee Chafin was a citizen of the United States and a sergeant first class in the U.S. [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 6:54 pm
See United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2008, 6:33 am
Per United States v. [read post]
18 Dec 2007, 7:24 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 11:40 am
NY State Dep't of Financial Services (Internet loans, Commerce Clause) United States v. [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 5:48 am
DOJ attorney Darryl Joseffer argued on behalf of the United States as amicus curiae in support of Microsoft. [read post]
2 Oct 2007, 12:03 am
No. 65) at 7-8; compare United States v. [read post]
24 Dec 2016, 6:57 am
In re Application of Gonzales v Batres, 2015 WL 12831299 ( D. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 4:52 am
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas declined to certify a class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 12:45 pm
United States v. [read post]
8 Dec 2023, 7:54 am
On December 6, the Colorado Supreme Court heard oral argument in Griswold v. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 5:30 am
Last November, I posted an entry about United States v. [read post]
30 Jul 2019, 9:18 am
"We've got a history with race and voting here in the United States. [read post]
2 Feb 2007, 6:31 am
Per United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2009, 9:00 am
In the class action suit In re Crocs, Inc. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 9:08 am
However, Citizens United began as a challenge by a non-profit regarding a pay-per-view movie; until the Court ordered re-hearing, the broader challenge to McConnell, Austin, or the McCain-Feingold Act was not before it. [read post]
12 Jul 2007, 9:59 am
State and its companion cases, the Indiana Supreme Court disposed of several cases that all asked the same question: does the United States Supreme Court's 2004 holding in Blakely v. [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 10:11 am
On March 5, 2012, however, the Supreme Court put the Kiobel case back on the calendar for re-argument, and directed the parties to brief whether and under what circumstances the ATS allows courts to address violations of the law of nations that occur outside the United States. [read post]
