Search for: "Lake v. United States" Results 721 - 740 of 1,396
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jul 2014, 1:45 pm by Native American Rights Fund
Idaho (state taxation, cigarettes) on 6/23/14.* United States Federal Trial Courts Bulletin http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/dct/2014dct.html Cases featured: Akiachak Native Community v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 6:00 am by Jon Robinson
Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., the United States Supreme Court announced the test for determining admiralty jurisdiction over tort claims: A party seeking to invoke federal admiralty jurisdiction . . . over a tort claim must satisfy conditions of location and of connection with maritime activity. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 9:39 am by Kirk Jenkins
Our reports on the oral arguments from the May term of the Illinois Supreme Court continue with Lake County Grading Company, LLC v. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 10:12 am by Don Cruse
Workers compensation death benefits STATE OFFICE OF RISK MANAGEMENT v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 6:00 am by Dan Hoerner
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit (based in Cincinnati, Ohio) in United States v. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 12:22 pm by Lyle Denniston
United States); whether it violates the “privileges or immunities” of a businessman who wants to operate a ferry service to be denied a permit to compete with an existing service on a public lake in Washington State (Courtney v. [read post]
29 May 2014, 8:45 am by WIMS
EPA released the third edition of a report, Climate Change Indicators in the United States. [read post]
28 May 2014, 6:09 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
” This right was first recognized in 1906 by the United States Supreme Court in Winters v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 11:57 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
United States, 316 U.S. 651 (1942) (amending opinion to make clear that certain legal issues were available for consideration on remand (see 316 U.S. 286 (1942)) [read post]
27 May 2014, 11:57 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
United States, 316 U.S. 651 (1942) (amending opinion to make clear that certain legal issues were available for consideration on remand (see 316 U.S. 286 (1942)) [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 6:08 am by Kevin Schad appellate division SDOH
 Yesterday, the Court upheld the sentence in the case of United States v. [read post]
17 Apr 2014, 7:36 am by Jeff Welty
It’s uncharted territory, but I seriously doubt that pervasive and persistent surveillance of that nature comports with the Fourth Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in United States v. [read post]