Search for: "United States v. Gerber" Results 41 - 60 of 81
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Nov 2011, 4:47 am
Indeed, “[t]he Fourth Amendment itself contains no requirements about when the search or seizure is to occur or the duration’” (Syphers, 426 F3d at 469, quoting United States v Gerber, 994 F2d 1556, 1559-1560). [read post]
25 Aug 2011, 10:42 pm by Russell Jackson
  Indeed, the fact that the individual unit that the plaintiff owned may no longer be available is irrelevant; the plans and other units of the product are available from which the plaintiff -- usually through expert testimony -- can make her case. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
 At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 2:26 am by Goldberg Segalla LLP
  In April 2010, the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri denied the reinsurers’ motion. [read post]
20 May 2010, 7:50 am by Goldberg Segalla LLP
May 17, 2010)  The Supreme Court recently invited the Solicitor General to file a brief expressing the views of the United States in Louisiana Safety Ass’n v. [read post]
13 May 2010, 12:58 pm by South Florida Lawyers
A leading relevant case, Gerber v Keyes, was decided by a Florida appellate court and New York State ruled in a similar fashion in Wegman v Dairylea Cooperative, Inc. [read post]