Search for: "United States v. Washington" Results 1141 - 1160 of 8,883
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2019, 9:15 am by Gene Quinn
On June 19, it will be five years since the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Alice Corp. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2007, 8:00 pm
On February 1, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed in The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System, on behalf of the University of Texas at Austin; Hydro-Quebec v. [read post]
28 Feb 2017, 7:07 pm
(Washington Monument Pix © Larry Catá Backer 2016)I recently announced the forthcoming publication by Carolina Academic Press of my Elements of Law and the United States Legal System (ISBN: 978-1-61163-927-8 • e-ISBN: 978-1-61163-984-1).The work made sense as a century of legalization (here and here) and judicialization (here and here) forces more and more people worldwide to bump up against aspects of aspects of the U.S: legal system. [read post]
31 Jan 2014, 10:38 am by National Indian Law Library
Lampert (prisoner, religious freedom)* State Courts Bulletinhttp://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2014state.htmlCases featured: Kealoha v. [read post]
26 Mar 2007, 11:36 am
United States, 404 F.3d 527 (1st Cir. 2005) (our coverage here), the First notes that since United States v. [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 4:59 pm
  The United States Supreme Court seems to otherwise have tried to put the calamity of Bush v. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 7:17 am by Kate Howard
United States 16-142 Issue: Whether 21 U.S.C. [read post]
8 Sep 2012, 6:27 pm
In a dispute with the Libyan embassy in Washington, DC, however, the owner of such domains won before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 11:54 am by David Super
§ 1361, federal courts may issue writs of “mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 5:58 pm
The decision was not a close call, the court confirmed, because the Ministry had purchased American goods and acted commercially with direct effects in the United States. [read post]