Search for: "United States v. Burden" Results 5461 - 5480 of 9,847
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Apr 2014, 8:09 am by Larry
United States, may impact the analysis in this case. [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 9:49 am by Steve Kalar
United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003) is the seminal Justice Breyer decision on the rights of defendants facing involuntary medication to restore competency. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 5:45 pm by Theodore Harvatin
In the United States, the prosecutor bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 5:57 am by Joy Waltemath
Section 2412(d) provides for mandatory attorneys’ fees if the position of the United States was not substantially justified and the prevailing party meets certain financial eligibility requirements. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 2:20 pm by John Elwood
United States, 13-7120. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 9:24 am by Maureen Johnston
United States 13-744Issue: Whether a medical professional can be convicted of “knowingly and willfully” making a false statement in medical records or reports under 18 U.S.C. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 11:59 am by Jan Baran
Once the Court granted probable jurisdiction in McCutcheon v. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 4:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
Rubin eloquently articulated that employees are powerless to effect change in the workplace on an individual level, reinforcing the public policy of the United States to allow employees to organize and act in concert. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 2:58 pm by Joey Fishkin
In yesterday’s big campaign finance case, McCutcheon v. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 2:35 pm by George Ticoras, Esq.
” Citing Citizens United, Justice Roberts wrote, “Disclosure requirements burden speech, but—unlike the aggregate limits—they do not impose a ceiling on speech. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 9:58 am
District Court for the District of Columbia:  In re Application of the United States of America for Nondisclosure Order, 2014 WL 1273227 (2014) (“In re Application, supra”). [read post]
1 Apr 2014, 9:52 am by John Stigi
Mar. 19, 2014), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Boyle, J.) denied lead plaintiff’s class certification motion in a consolidated action alleging claims under Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (“1933 Act”), 15 U.S.C. [read post]