Search for: "Rogers v. United States"
Results 821 - 840
of 1,514
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Apr 2022, 6:30 am
Had one looked at this issue in 1921, the United States would have had company: At that time, Australia and Canada, countries that, like the United States, were influenced by the British tradition, provided judges with indefinite tenure during good behavior.[3]However, each of these countries amended their constitutions and adopted mandatory retirement ages for their federal judges later in the 20thcentury – 70 in Australia, 75 in Canada. [read post]
9 Jun 2006, 5:49 am
United Kingdom, at paras. 46-49; repeated in Kalogeropoulou and Others v. [read post]
19 Apr 2023, 12:42 pm
United States. [read post]
7 Mar 2017, 4:09 am
United States, the court ruled 7-0 (without the participation of Justice Elena Kagan) that the advisory federal sentencing guidelines are not subject to vagueness challenges under the due process clause. [read post]
1 Apr 2017, 11:52 am
I am happy to announce the publication of my article: "A Lex Mercatoria for Corporate Social Responsibility Codes Without the State? [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 5:49 am
In a rare, contested concurrent use proceeding, the Board awarded junior user ABF concurrent use registrations for the three marks shown below, for hotel and motel services, in the entire United States except for the State of Arizona. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 1:46 pm
They seek a judicial order that would require their release from custody into the United States. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 6:13 am
., Ltd. v. [read post]
9 May 2011, 12:17 pm
The district court didn't let him, holding that the United States and California were already defendants and had more than adequate incentives to defend the relevant tax statutes. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 8:00 am
United States, No. 7:13CV1789 (S.D. [read post]
24 May 2023, 8:00 am
United States, No. 3:22-cv-00181 (E.D. [read post]
6 Dec 2019, 8:00 am
United States, No. 3:17-cv-00633-VLB. [read post]
20 Feb 2018, 6:18 am
Contrast Rogers v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 8:46 am
” And finally, in United States v. [read post]
18 Feb 2009, 8:20 am
With respect to these seventeen petitioners, the Executive Branch has determined not to allow them to enter the United States. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 6:52 am
Nevertheless, the newspaper repeated the defamation: in an article alongside a photograph of Watters the newspaper had stated: We may have to apologise to this revolting pervert but will we mean it? [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 5:52 am
Harwell v. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 11:12 am
Content Regulation * State v. [read post]
5 Aug 2016, 5:40 am
United State v. [read post]
17 Jun 2008, 5:55 pm
” There’s the first rub: The United States Congress felt that Daubert and its progeny, particularly Kumho Tire, somehow strayed from the plain language of Rule 702, so much so that Congress felt the need to amend the Rule “to reflect the changes” in the Rule brought about by the United States Supreme Court in interpreting Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. [read post]
