Search for: "Ure v. United States" Results 81 - 100 of 282
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Aug 2013, 5:08 am by Susan Brenner
She sent the request to “a member of the Executive Protection Unit (EPU) of the Washington State Patrol. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 2:38 pm
The requirement of authentication is thus a condition precedent to admitting evidence” (United States v. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:32 pm by Wolfgang Demino
  SHARON EUL et al., on behalf of themselves and a class, Plaintiffs,v.TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS et al., Defendants.No. 15 C 7755.United States District Court, N.D. [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In support of its argument that NJT was an "arm of the state" entitled to invoke sovereign immunity, defendants cited a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit holding that NJT is entitled to invoke sovereign immunity in federal court (see Karns v Shanahan, 879 F3d 504, 519 [3d Cir 2018]). [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In support of its argument that NJT was an "arm of the state" entitled to invoke sovereign immunity, defendants cited a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit holding that NJT is entitled to invoke sovereign immunity in federal court (see Karns v Shanahan, 879 F3d 504, 519 [3d Cir 2018]). [read post]
9 Mar 2018, 4:34 am by Edith Roberts
Tesla Energy Operations Inc., which asks when a state or local government can appeal the denial of a motion to dismiss based on state-action immunity. [read post]
30 Oct 2017, 5:05 am by Jim Singer
In the past year, several Federal Circuit decisions defined situations in which software inventions could be eligible for patenting in the United States. [read post]
29 Mar 2021, 8:22 am by Phil Dixon
This post summarizes a decision released by the United States Supreme Court on March 25, 2021. [read post]
20 Mar 2024, 4:44 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Mayor of City of New York v Brady, 115 NY 599, 617 [1889]; United States v Throckmorton, 98 US 61, 68 [1878]), or part of a “larger fraudulent scheme” (Newin Corp. v Hartford Acc. [read post]