Search for: "UNITED V. PEREZ" Results 661 - 680 of 752
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Oct 2013, 11:48 am by Cynthia L. Hackerott
Copus pointed out that this issue has been raised in a case, UPMC Braddock v Perez, currently pending before the D.C. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 4:02 pm
It is very rarely permitted, since the American system of justice is premised upon an open system in which, whenever one side wants to communicate with the Court, it has to give prior notice to the other side, so that they too will have an opportunity to be heard.).The "ex parte" order would give the RIAA permission to take "immediate discovery" -- before the defendants have been served or given notice -- which authorizes the issuance of subpoenas to the ISP's asking for the… [read post]
26 Jun 2024, 6:16 am by Ahilan Arulanantham
Through the TPS program, Congress has given the Secretary of Homeland Security discretion to protect people in the United States from deportation if their home countries are unsafe to accept their return. [read post]
21 Sep 2020, 4:07 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
Maldonado v DiBre, 140 AD3d 1501 [3d Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 908 [2016] [“even if, as plaintiffs claim, the loss of the units was not voluntary, they still would not have standing to pursue derivative claims”]). [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Redistricting — which is "primarily the duty and responsibility of the State" (Perry v Perez, 565 US 388, 392 [2012] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Growe v Emison, 507 US 25, 34 [1993]) — is a complex and contentious process that, historically, has been "within the legislative power . . . subject to constitutional regulation and limitation" (Matter of Orans, 15 NY2d 339, 352 [1965]). [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Redistricting — which is "primarily the duty and responsibility of the State" (Perry v Perez, 565 US 388, 392 [2012] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Growe v Emison, 507 US 25, 34 [1993]) — is a complex and contentious process that, historically, has been "within the legislative power . . . subject to constitutional regulation and limitation" (Matter of Orans, 15 NY2d 339, 352 [1965]). [read post]
30 Oct 2007, 1:37 am
Keisler, No. 06-60644"Pakistani native's petition for review of a denial of his application for cancellation of removal from the United States is denied as misuse of a social security number in violation of 42 U.S.C. section 408(a)(7)(A) falls within the definition a crime involving moral turpitude, for purposes of ineligibility for a grant of cancellation of removal. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 9:02 pm by Edward A. Fallone
  The Citizens United case rests upon an absolutist view of the First Amendment that stresses the protection of all speech, without regard to whether it is a human being or a corporation speaking. [read post]
18 Aug 2014, 7:44 am by Joy Waltemath
Determining that the DOL presented sufficient evidence of adverse employment actions taken against the employee, the court denied the employer’s motion for summary judgment (Perez v U.S. [read post]
25 May 2012, 1:35 pm by Jeff Gamso
United States, and looking back 160 years to Justice Story's one paragraph opinion for a unanimous court in United States v. [read post]
21 Mar 2022, 3:34 am by SHG
Franklin also owns several firearms, which the Government contends “have long been recognized as being ‘tools of the drug trade.'” [Doc. 87 at 6 n.2 (quoting in part United States v. [read post]