Search for: "United States v. Close" Results 6301 - 6320 of 14,198
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
In 2021, Buntion appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States and asked the Justices to declare his 30 years on death row a cruel and unusual punishment. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
As relevant here, the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York denied plaintiff's motion and granted the City's motion for judgment as a matter of law. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
As relevant here, the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York denied plaintiff's motion and granted the City's motion for judgment as a matter of law. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 8:12 am by Margaret Sachs
Why not allow these investors to sue in United States courts? [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 9:26 am by Bexis
United States Tobacco Co., 538 F.3d 217, 221-22 (3d Cir. 2008)) have both held that the 1996 addition of "deceptive" to the Act didn't change the obligation of private plaintiffs (unlike the state AG) to prove the elements of fraud. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 9:18 am by Ronald Mann
  Although the text pretty strongly favors Roche, Stanford and the United States (as amicus) presented a strong policy case for public ownership of publicly funded inventions. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 6:50 pm by David Lat
; on the other hand, AMK wrote Citizens United, which was on the receiving end of President Obama’s slap last year.So it’s a close call. [read post]
3 Jul 2024, 2:41 pm by Ben Sperry
United States could have an impact on statutory construction going forward. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 2:17 pm by John Elwood
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 17-71, and Markle Interests, LLC. v. [read post]
16 Jul 2015, 7:25 am
§ 11.01(16) is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 3 of the Wisconsin Constitution because its language "'is so sweeping that its sanctions may be applied to constitutionally protected conduct which the state is not permitted to regulate.'"  State v. [read post]