Search for: "United States v. California"
Results 6101 - 6120
of 13,838
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Apr 2021, 8:04 am
Ultimately, the greatest significance of the Winn-Dixie decision may lie in its potential to finally thrust this issue into the United States Supreme Court on Gil’s anticipated petition for certiorari in the near future. [read post]
26 Jul 2013, 5:50 am
SEC v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 2:50 pm
" But in that case (which involved the sale of "mounted animal specimens," which was illegal in the taxpayers' home state of California) the Tax Court specifically found that, despite California law, "there is a market throughout the United States for items comparable to those donated by the [taxpayers]. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 10:07 am
The statute says that state law is preempted when a crash occurs "on the high seas beyond three nautical miles from the shore of the United States. [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 3:42 pm
Code §1201 - KidnappingUnited States of America v. [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 3:42 pm
Code §1201 - KidnappingUnited States of America v. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 5:52 am
This outcome is consistent with California's approach to the issue (Laliberte v. [read post]
18 Aug 2018, 7:09 am
See United States v. [read post]
17 Aug 2018, 5:40 pm
See United States v. [read post]
29 Dec 2013, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court decided United States v. [read post]
6 Jan 2020, 7:53 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Aug 2024, 12:25 pm
Perry (same-sex marriage) Joined blue state amicus brief in United States v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 6:54 am
’” His conduct was also sufficiently reprehensible to qualify for punitive damages under state law (Marlo v. [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 9:56 am
In the United States District Court, Southwestern District, Tempe, Arizona Case No. [read post]
30 Jul 2019, 7:00 am
” In Kyllo v. [read post]
25 Aug 2017, 8:18 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
15 Aug 2022, 7:33 am
In Massachusetts v. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 7:31 am
California and Patterson v. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 10:02 am
Curiel of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California has just (this morning by Pacific Time) handed down two decisions denying a couple of Qualcomm motions for preliminary injunctions. [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 11:25 am
PolhillCase Number: 13-cv-01729 (United States District Court for the Central District of California)Case Filed: September 24, 2013Qualifying Judgment/Order: December 6, 2014 1/27/2015 4/27/2015 2015-5 SEC v. [read post]
