Search for: "United States v. Burden" Results 8561 - 8580 of 9,848
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Nov 2009, 6:46 am by Kenneth J. Vanko
--Court: United States District Court for the District of OregonOpinion Date: 11/13/09Cite: Epiq Class Action and Claims Solutions, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Nov 2009, 2:09 am
iStock_000000617148Medium.jpg In illegal weapons possession case, defendant who objected to admitting fingerprint expert evidence that was “used ... in matching the partial latent fingerprint recovered from the [charged] firearm” to the defendant's left thumb print, had to “produce data and experts to demonstrate why” the expert evidence should not be admitted; the trial court did not improperly shift the burden of… [read post]
23 Nov 2009, 7:12 am
United States, 551 U.S. 338, 357 (2007)); see also Rita, 551 U.S. at 356 (“The appropriateness of brevity or length, conciseness or detail, when to write, what to say, depends upon circumstances. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 5:00 am
Therefore, he recommended that United States District Court grant defendants' motion for summary judgment. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 6:27 pm by Keith Rizzardi
On March 24, 2000, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) designated Canada lynx as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. ? [read post]
17 Nov 2009, 6:19 am
Briefly, Fredreka Schouten at USA Today writes that a Court ruling in favor of the petitioners in Citizens United may drastically alter 2010 state gubernatorial elections by loosening restrictions on previously prohibited corporate and union donations, while the Boston Globe reports that the firefighters in Ricci v. [read post]
17 Nov 2009, 6:11 am by Lee E. Berlik
Two recent United States District Court Cases, one out of Minnesota, Kay Beer Distributing, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Nov 2009, 6:11 am
Two recent United States District Court Cases, one out of Minnesota, Kay Beer Distributing, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Nov 2009, 5:00 am
("USEC"), which provided uranium enrichment services to the United States government, was renegotiating a contract with a Russian corporation. [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 1:18 pm
Prior to the decision in Daga Capital, there were a few decisions, specifically in the context of section 14A, stating that the burden was on the Revenue to show the link between the expenditure incurred and the tax-free income earned. [read post]