Search for: "Roberts, et al v. United States" Results 621 - 640 of 722
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Nov 2010, 8:59 am by Lyle Denniston
Winn, et al. (09-987) and Garriott v. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 7:18 am by msatta
Kentucky, the Supreme Court ruled that failure of a defense attorney to inform a client that a collateral consequence of their felony plea could lead to the client’s (in this case, a forty-year permanent resident in the United States) deportation constituted deficient performance by the attorney.[8] Two years later, in Missouri v. [read post]
12 Jul 2015, 10:44 am by Schachtman
United States Food and Drug Admin., Civ. [read post]
4 Oct 2014, 12:09 pm by Schachtman
That goal ultimately came to have bipartisan support in the United States, largely as a result of Selikoff’s advocacy. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 12:00 pm by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
The pills were ultimately sold to wholesale prescription drug distribution companies ("corrupt distribution companies"), which then sold them to pharmacies and to other wholesale prescription distribution drug companies across the United States. [read post]
28 Nov 2008, 12:14 pm
: Peer International Corporation, Southern Music Publishing Co and Peermusic (UK) Ltd v Editoria Musical de Cuba (IP finance) Justice Kitchin upholds British Beer and Pub Association and British Hospitality Association appeal against decision of Copyright Tribunal on basis for calculation of fees which members have to pay for background music (IPKat) Contempt of court: the risks of false testimony in trade mark infringement proceedings: KJM Superbikes Ltd v Hinton (IPKat) (IPKat)… [read post]
19 Aug 2015, 11:36 am by Alex Polishuk
Johnson, et al., takes the position that it does not “take much for a plaintiff in a discrimination case to overcome a summary judgment motion. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 2:32 pm by Victor
Daniel Shaviro, Man Who Lost too Much: Zarin v. [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 1:48 pm by Schachtman
” Jonathan Samet, et al., eds., Institute of Medicine Review of Asbestos: Selected Cancers (2006).[1] The Institute of Medicine’s monograph has fostered a more circumspect approach in some of the federal agencies. [read post]