Search for: "United States v. May"
Results 7001 - 7020
of 47,733
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 May 2014, 6:00 pm
The Court in Michigan v. [read post]
12 Apr 2016, 6:12 am
The Court next week will hear oral arguments in what may be the highest-stakes (at least in terms of dollars potentially at stake) case of the Term, Universal Health Services v United States ex rel. [read post]
29 May 2016, 1:14 pm
(In a brief filed on May 20, the government also recommended that the Court grant review in Fry v. [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 3:54 am
On appeal from: [2014] EWCA Civ 1216 In order to qualify for a loan from the Government to help with University fees a student must be settled in the United Kingdom, and have been lawfully resident on the first day of the course. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 12:44 pm
See State of Nevada, et al. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 2:23 pm
In a 5-4 opinion written by Justice Kennedy, the United States Supreme today held in United States v. [read post]
4 May 2011, 11:13 am
We said that a court may not “rely on the uniqueness of an agreement to arbitrate as a basis for a state-law holding that enforcement would be unconscionable, for this would enable the court to effect what . . . the state legislature cannot. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 7:39 am
Corp. v. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 11:48 am
United States (W.D. [read post]
17 Oct 2022, 9:53 pm
I'm also a bit worried that Congress may not adopt the Open App Markets Act as we're approaching the end of the legislative term, and there is a risk of some Senators and United States Representatives preferring not to hold the decisive vote shortly before the Epic v. [read post]
26 Dec 2020, 6:24 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 10:39 am
The Supreme Court of the United States issued its much-anticipated decision in Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 9:07 am
Circuit's opinion in United States v. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 6:00 am
United States Parole Commission v. [read post]
24 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
Section 37 states “the High Court may by order (whether interlocutory or final) grant an injunction or appoint a receiver in all cases in which it appears to the court to be just and convenient to do so. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 12:12 am
Caballes (2005) and United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2023, 5:38 am
Although ICJ decisions lack formal precedential effect, I agree with Jamshidi that the ICJ’s decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. [read post]
1 May 2013, 5:06 am
Ireland and the United Kingdom both submitted third-party comments in TV Vest v. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 2:28 pm
In United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 1:04 am
UUtah asked Assignees to cooperate in petitioningthe United States Patent and Trademark Office(“USPTO”) to correct the inventorship of the TuschlPatents by adding Dr. [read post]
