Search for: "Horne v. Department of Agriculture"
Results 81 - 98
of 98
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jul 2013, 4:38 pm
The Sixth District Court of Appeal recently presided over such a conflict in Save Panoche Valley v. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 9:41 pm
Department of Agriculture, the U.S. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 8:22 am
In Horne v. [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 4:37 pm
In Horne v. [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 3:15 am
Ilya Somin argues that the Supreme Courts recent unanimous opinion in Horne v. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 5:35 am
In a second unanimous opinion, authored by Justice Thomas, the Court in Horne v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 9:41 am
In essence, the Court’s ruling in a raisin growers’ case — Horne v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 8:07 am
In an opinion announced by Justice Thomas for a unanimous Court, the Justices held that the petitioners may pursue their takings claim. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 7:37 am
In a relatively brief opinion in Horne v. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 4:09 am
Department of Agriculture (2012) 133 S.Ct. 638, also pending before the U.S. [read post]
16 Mar 2013, 9:28 pm
A group of California vineyard operators will be represented in the case of Horne v. [read post]
7 Jan 2013, 9:02 am
Department of Agriculture – must processors of grapes into raisins go to a special federal court to seek payments for a part of their crop that federal rules require be kept off the market 12-52 — Dan’s City Used Cars v. [read post]
21 Nov 2012, 9:03 am
Department of Agriculture. [read post]
20 Nov 2012, 11:33 am
§ 608c(15) to exhaust all claims and defenses in administrative proceedings before the United States Department of Agriculture, with exclusive jurisdiction for review in federal district court. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 12:01 am
Department of Agriculture seeks to impose on independent raisin farmers Marvin and Laura Horne when they protested the enforcement of a USDA "marketing order" that demanded that the Hornes turn over 47 percent of their crop without compensation. ... [read post]
17 Aug 2012, 2:52 pm
In Horne v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm
In R (SK Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] 1 WLR 1527 the Court of Appeal appears to suggest that not every type of public law breach, committed after an initially valid detention, would render continued detention unlawful. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 11:58 am
& Tech. 319-349 (2010).Horne, Jennifer Skougard. [read post]
