Search for: "United States v. Choice"
Results 1221 - 1240
of 6,605
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Oct 2008, 1:32 am
Unsurprisingly, perhaps, the judgment stated that there was no prevailing party. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 8:11 am
See the United States brief at 22-25. [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 11:20 am
Sony opposed Tenenbaum's motions, and the United States also intervened, since Tenenbaum challenged the statutory damages award as being overly excessive. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court wrote its Hollingsworth v. [read post]
6 Jan 2011, 9:15 am
United States, 129 S. [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 8:32 pm
United States v. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 5:33 am
In Georgia - and indeed, throughout the United States, we have a concept called "spoliation. [read post]
13 Oct 2024, 6:30 am
Section 2 states that states that the “right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States” cannot be “denied to any male inhabitants, being twenty-one years of age” of a state “or in any way abridged. [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 9:06 am
In the 1986 case Moore v. [read post]
12 Aug 2022, 5:55 am
Five years ago today, white supremacist extremists from across the United States traveled to Charlottesville, Virginia for the “Unite the Right” rally. [read post]
9 Aug 2022, 4:30 am
He also expressly joined Justice Scalia's dissenting opinion analogizing homosexual conduct to bigamy, incest, and prostitution.In both United States v. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 11:53 am
United States, 370 U.S. 294 (1962). [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 5:38 pm
Section V then focuses on the alternative to ideology and economic reform offered through Chinese Party and state practice. [read post]
25 Nov 2015, 4:29 pm
See United States v. [read post]
28 Dec 2024, 3:14 am
S. 592, 600 (1988) (holding that a statute permitting the agency to terminate an employee whenever it “‘deems such termination necessary or advisable in the interests of the United States’” was discretionary). [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 3:59 am
Public policy does not nullify the choice she made (cf., Matter of Abramovich v Board of Educ., 46 NY2d 450, cert denied 444 US 845). [read post]
16 Mar 2018, 3:42 pm
“ ‘The supremacy clause of the United States Constitution establishes a constitutional choice-of-law rule, makes federal law paramount, and vests Congress with the power to preempt state law. [read post]
9 Mar 2014, 2:54 pm
” In THI of New Mexico at Hobbs Ctr, LLC v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 5:44 pm
It was also distinguishable from the use of private property for the purposes of collecting signatures for a petition (Appleby v United Kingdom, no. 44306/98, 6 May 2003) or the general prohibition on a ship entering the State’s territorial waters for campaigning purposes (Women on Waves v Portugal, no. 31276/05, 3 February 2009). [read post]
21 Jun 2012, 2:17 pm
Thus, the District Court for the Southern District of New York followed the decision of Jewel v. [read post]
