Search for: "State v. Dollar"
Results 1041 - 1060
of 9,560
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Aug 2011, 7:41 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Mar 2007, 11:16 am
Pop quiz: You are a United States District Judge. [read post]
21 Nov 2022, 6:44 pm
Dollar Tree by Judge Terrence R. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 9:47 pm
In 2011, a unanimous Supreme Court held in American Electric Power Co. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 5:50 am
When Congress signed off on providing $3.4 billion of funding for the Department of Justice to settle the 15-year-old Cobell v. [read post]
24 Oct 2024, 10:38 am
On October 1, 2024, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.C. [read post]
16 Apr 2008, 6:09 am
“Bitter and longstanding” are words that JTR Cutsumpas used to describe a custody battle in Ford v. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 9:00 am
- 800-JR Cigar v. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 10:00 am
” Therefore, the statute outlaws most of the billion-dollar industry in hunting videos and magazines, at least if any of those videos are ever sold in the District of Columbia. [read post]
27 Sep 2017, 6:08 pm
Lackie, 2017 ONCA 716 Cobb v. [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 6:10 am
Melvin Isaac v. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 6:26 am
In the 2018 case, Murphy v. [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 3:00 am
The case of the day is Belize Social Development Ltd. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2022, 6:16 am
In April 2020, the Fifth Circuit in United States v. [read post]
24 Oct 2023, 9:01 pm
Instead, it allows anyone “injured” by the enforcement of one of the disfavored federal laws to sue the offending party—whether a local, state, or federal officer—for “a civil penalty of fifty thousand dollars per occurrence. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 6:25 am
Sackett v. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 6:25 am
Sackett v. [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 4:00 am
v. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 6:10 pm
It demands damages worth 2,257,175,000 US dollar, based on 56.5 million unauthorised copies in China as of early June 2009, multiplied by 39.95 US dollar per copy. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 8:05 pm
In doing so, the husband was required to waive a dollar-for-dollar portion of the pension under federal law. [read post]
