Search for: "US v. Levelle Grant" Results 8141 - 8160 of 9,112
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Oct 2009, 1:18 pm
Arizona (384 U.S. 436 (1966)), or otherwise inform such an individual of any rights that the individual may or may not have to counsel or to remain silent consistent with Miranda v. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 10:00 am
Three months after the sale, in January 2007, plaintiffs -- nine individuals who reside in seven apartments in the apartment complex -- sued MetLife and PCV/ST on behalf of a putative class of all current and former tenants who allegedly were, or will be, charged rents that exceed rent stabilization levels for any period during which the landlord receives real estate tax benefits under the J-51 program. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 9:42 am
Arizona (384 U.S. 436 (1966)), or otherwise inform such an individual of any rights that the individual may or may not have to counsel or to remain silent consistent with Miranda v. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 4:12 pm
Brentwood Borough Council v Ball & Ors [2009] EWHC 2433 (QB) This was the hearing of an application for an injunction by Brentwood BC. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 12:43 pm
" -- Notes by Edward Gordon Vázquez Menchaca, Fernando (1512-1569). [read post]
21 Oct 2009, 1:34 pm
" The district court granted the motion and dismissed the claims. [read post]
20 Oct 2009, 7:42 am
In the county court (noted by us here), one defendant (subsequently supported by the others) applied to strike out the claims. [read post]
18 Oct 2009, 10:00 pm
Ct. 1937 (2009).Today's thought was prompted by the recent decision granting without prejudice a motion to dismiss in Wright v. [read post]
16 Oct 2009, 3:18 pm
Consumer testing may be useful to determine consumer understanding of each claim, in context. [read post]
15 Oct 2009, 2:53 pm
JFS sought leave to appeal to the then House of Lords, which was granted. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 3:05 pm by Michael S. Snarr
A February 2006 fact sheet published by the Foreign Agriculture Service explains that the SPS Agreement was adopted during the Uruguay Round with the support of “[v]irtually all countries, including the United States” because countries previously had used vague and opaque SPS measures to disguise restrictions on trade. [read post]