Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 7541 - 7560
of 8,253
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2009, 3:59 pm
Here are just a few of the many highlights: The federal sentencing system, which includes both sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum sentencing statutes, has undergone significant change since the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2009, 1:52 am
Though the settlement in Toysrus.com v. [read post]
23 Jun 2009, 10:48 pm
No. 1 v. [read post]
23 Jun 2009, 10:11 pm
Holder largely dodged the core constitutional issue in question and has forced me to wonder how the Court will handle a different, though similarly charged, issue in Ricci v. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 2:45 pm
Dist. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 2:08 pm
Holder and all you could want to know about is available at the scotuswiki here. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 1:16 pm
Supreme Court, June 15, 2009 Nijhawan v. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 1:10 pm
Holder. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 11:40 am
S’holders Litig., Inc., 845 A.2d 1096, 1107 (Del. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 10:43 am
Holder. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 9:31 am
Holder, the plaintiff, a subdivision of Austin, Texas, sued the United States, arguing that Section 5 exceeds the scope of Congress's authority to enforce the 15th Amendment. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 7:35 am
The United States Supreme Court has decided Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 12:00 pm
United States and Nken v. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 7:36 am
Ricci, et al. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 6:05 pm
Supreme Court in District Attorney's Office for Third Judicial Dist. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 2:31 am
With respect to the binding force of a jurisdiction agreement in a bill of lading for the third party holder of the bill of lading, stakeholders have suggested that a carrier under a bill of lading should be bound by and at the same token allowed to invoke a jurisdiction clause against the regular third-party holder, unless the bill is not sufficiently clear in determining jurisdiction. [read post]
Supreme Court upholds Third Circuit's classification of mail fraud offense as an "aggravated felony"
16 Jun 2009, 7:59 am
Petitioner argued that under the categorical approach of Taylor v. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 8:29 pm
But defendant Avery, like many credit card holders, had never even visited the state in question--so the statute of limitations could be tolled forever. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 7:07 am
Holder, 08-495). [read post]
