Search for: "United States v. Holmes"
Results 761 - 780
of 868
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2009, 2:43 am
Even as long ago as 1980 we felt it proper to 599 "assume" that unlawful police behavior would "be dealt with appropriately" by the authorities, United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 9:10 pm
The United States legal culture has swallowed whole a largely false account of our legal history. [read post]
28 Oct 2009, 6:21 pm
Harrison v United States, 392 US 219, 224-225 (1968). [read post]
10 Oct 2009, 5:55 am
Milkborne disease outbreaks by Food category, United States, 1973-2005 (source: FTCLDF via CDC). [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 10:13 am
United States v. [read post]
8 Oct 2009, 2:13 am
Holmes made her initial appearance in federal court in San Jose before United States Magistrate Judge Patricia V. [read post]
5 Oct 2009, 1:49 pm
Holmes v. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 8:57 am
Opinion below (6th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner's reply Docket: 08-1341 Title: United States v. [read post]
19 Sep 2009, 12:55 am
And now, in United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2009, 11:55 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Sep 2009, 6:40 am
The rule that disqualifies persons who are not 35 years of age from eligibility for the Presidency of the United States is quite hard or rigid. [read post]
30 Aug 2009, 12:58 am
The case is Ray v. [read post]
2 Aug 2009, 10:03 pm
So said Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes of the United States Supreme Court in a case that blew me away when I first encountered it in law school. [read post]
2 Aug 2009, 9:57 am
” (United States v. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 2:25 pm
United States v. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 10:27 am
" It has been a truism since Marbury v. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 9:29 am
Holmes. [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 3:23 pm
United States, 193 U.S. 197 (1904) (Holmes, J., dissenting). [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 5:05 pm
" Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Path of the Law, 10 HARV. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 2:22 pm
The EAJA provided that a party prevailing against the United States could get attorney's fees unless the position of the United States was "substantially justified. [read post]
