Search for: "United States v. Grant" Results 6461 - 6480 of 25,377
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Mar 2022, 12:21 pm by Andrew Hamm
United States 21-1191Issue: Whether federal district courts exceed their statutory or Article III power by issuing proclamations that their dismissal “counts as a ‘strike’ within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 12:00 am by Orin Kerr
On December 5th, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a Fourth Amendment case, Messerschmidt v. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 7:36 am by Marissa Miller
Broad coverage of the same-sex marriage cases, United States v. [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
" Further, said the court, "The fact that causes of action may be stated separately, invoke different legal theories, or seek different relief will not permit relitigation of claims," citing Pondview Corp. v Blatt, 95 AD3d 980.The test applied to determine if an action is ripe for application of the doctrine of res judicata is a pragmatic one, involving an analysis of how the facts are related as to time, space, origin or motivation, whether they form a convenient… [read post]
11 Dec 2009, 2:27 pm
So with retrospectives on my mind I thought it might be interesting to take a look at the United States Patent and Trademark Office Annual Report for 2009. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 5:00 pm
Obama, President of the United States, et al. [read post]
22 Apr 2022, 10:09 am by Lee Kovarsky
After filing a brief in support of the prisoner (Michael Nance), the United States sought and was granted time at oral argument. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 6:50 am
  Additionally, the United States has filed an amicus brief supporting petitioners that specifically casts doubt on the ability of the market to regulate fees. [read post]
26 Aug 2010, 3:45 am by Russ Bensing
  Its availability to review state court decisions was substantially limited in 1976 when the Supreme Court prohibited virtually all substantive review of search-and-seizure claims in habeas, and it was virtually gutted by the passage of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) in 1996, which provided for an exceedingly deferential standard of review:  a Federal court could grant relief only if the state court’s decision was… [read post]