Search for: "FORD v. UNITED STATES"
Results 881 - 900
of 1,123
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jun 2010, 3:34 pm
United States v. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 11:24 am
United States. [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 4:56 am
Applera Corp (Patently-O) (271 Patent Blog) District Court S D Indiana: Stay pending reexam lifted prior to issuance of reexam certificate (Docket Report) District Court N D Illinois: United States is not an indispensible party to false marking action: ZOJO Solutions Inc. v. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 4:59 pm
Bakke (1977); and Citizens United v. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 6:15 am
COLA stated that the matter would be referred to COLA's Contract Fiscal Compliance Unit for a determination. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 3:36 am
Unjust enrichment law varies considerably throughout the United States as well. [read post]
27 May 2010, 4:45 am
App. at 502-03 (citing United States v. [read post]
26 May 2010, 11:15 am
Gore to Parents Involved and Citizens United. [read post]
22 May 2010, 6:55 am
Credit Union v. [read post]
21 May 2010, 1:31 pm
Ford v. [read post]
18 May 2010, 10:51 pm
Under the United States Supreme Court interpretation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the defendant was clearly not seized as the United States Supreme Court held in a case called California v. [read post]
10 May 2010, 1:16 pm
The company has agreed to pay a civil penalty of $310,000, of which $155,000 will be paid to the United States and the other $155,000 to Virginia. [read post]
5 May 2010, 7:13 pm
It is worth noting that in the recent United States Supreme Court case of District of Columbia v. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 3:10 pm
"The institution is not going in the direction he thinks it should," he said.That was clear this year when he was on the losing side in Citizens United v. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 7:05 pm
Significantly, the Court was careful to note that pleading the requisite degree of “injury” for purposes of Prop 64 standing is not onerous:We also relied on the United States Supreme Court's description of "injury in fact" for federal court standing purposes as " 'an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized . . . and (b) "actual or imminent, not 'conjectural' or 'hypothetical,'… [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 4:29 pm
However, the United States Supreme Court in Reves v. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 6:59 am
The style of the case is Employers Mutual Casualty Company et al. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2010, 1:19 pm
On August 22, 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered judgment against Carpenter, finding it liable for 80% of the costs paid by the plaintiffs as of December 31, 2007, plus prejudgment interest. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 9:50 am
" Stevens leaves a diverse legal legacy, authoring landmark decisions ranging from Reno v ACLU, the 1997 decision that anointed the internet with broad First Amendment protection, to Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council [1984], which has guided the administrative state ever since. [read post]
10 Apr 2010, 5:12 am
In the recent landmark United States Supreme Court confrontation clause decisions, Justice Stevens voted with the majority in both Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
