Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 5201 - 5220
of 8,249
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Feb 2013, 12:46 am
The invalidation may have some serious repercussions on the ongoing Indian case ( BMS v. [read post]
11 May 2017, 11:45 am
Co. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2014, 6:55 am
And Wells linked to a District Court ruling in United States v. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 10:58 am
Part Four: User Generated Content (Content Treasure Trove v. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 7:52 am
Roper, 14-6873, becomes our new title holder. [read post]
5 Feb 2018, 8:51 am
(See, e.g., Kaiser Aetna v. [read post]
13 Aug 2022, 5:51 pm
United States, 959 F.2d 1558, 1561 (11th Cir. 1992). [read post]
19 Feb 2017, 9:02 pm
Not necessarily.Rumors have been circulating that the new EO will apply the same criteria as EO 13769 but expressly exempt green card holders, student visa holders, and other people with substantial contacts with the United States. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 4:25 pm
So in effect it made the landowner the holder of the leasing rights, but kept the mineral ownership in the State. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 2:32 pm
In Konop v. [read post]
18 Apr 2020, 7:00 am
The SJC cited a United States Supreme Court case involving a state statute extinguishing mineral rights when not exercised for 20 years, Texaco, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 6:43 am
MGFB Properties, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Oct 2016, 8:45 am
With regard to Hamilton Uptown, LLC v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 5:54 pm
In the appointment letter, Kosinki designates Burns to “perform the duties of United States District Judge temporarily for the District of Arizona for the specific case United States of America v. [read post]
26 Oct 2012, 9:00 am
This fall term, the United States Supreme Court will hear Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
4 Aug 2014, 11:30 am
However, according to the court in Crane v. [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 11:48 am
In its highly anticipated decision in Rosenbach v. [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 9:59 pm
Sandoz and Sandoz v. [read post]
19 Jan 2022, 10:35 pm
Tex. and unsuccessfully appealed by Ericsson's adversary in that case, HTC, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. [read post]