Search for: "State of Alabama v. United States" Results 501 - 520 of 2,125
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Apr 2022, 12:11 pm by Ronald Mann
Second, it was not “uniform … throughout the United States,” because debtors that filed during 2018 paid millions of dollars more if they didn’t file in Alabama or North Carolina than they would have paid if they had filed in those states. [read post]
12 Jan 2016, 4:05 am by Amy Howe
United States for this blog, with other coverage coming from Ben Einhouse and Victor Pinedo at Cornell’s Legal Information Institute. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 6:20 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
See, for example, Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v United States, 491 U.S. 617, 623 n. 3, 109 S Ct 2646, 105 L. [read post]
17 May 2013, 9:25 am by Steven Eversole
Namely, bingo games and operations have been granted legitimacy throughout the state - provided they meet a strict criteria of of six guidelines, per the 2009 Alabama Supreme Court decision in Barber v. [read post]
13 Mar 2024, 10:03 am by Sarah E. Straub
Recently, all eyes in the legal community turned to a federal district court in Alabama in the case of National Small Business United v. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 3:53 am by Edith Roberts
United States, which asks whether a guilty plea waives a defendant’s right to appeal the constitutionality of the law of conviction, and Jesner v. [read post]
21 Aug 2014, 6:00 am by Caitlin Byars
Fallon of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana denied a Motion for Summary Judgement on the issue of respondeat superior in the case of Bittel v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 7:07 am by Erin Miller
United States ex rel. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 3:45 pm
In United States v. 480.00 Acres of Land, No. 07-13584 (Feb. 11, 2009), the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (which covers Alabama, Florida, and Georgia), held "in order for a fact finding body to ignore a regulation in calculating 'just compensation' for a given piece of property, the landowner must show that the primary purpose of the regulation was to depress the property value of land or that the ordinance was enacted with… [read post]