Search for: "Grant v. United States" Results 1281 - 1300 of 26,049
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Dec 2011, 9:46 pm by Orin Kerr
(Orin Kerr) I’ve blogged a lot about the Ninth Circuit’s en banc case in United States v. [read post]
21 Jan 2012, 9:01 pm by Kali Borkoski
The Court announced three opinions in argued cases, including United States v. [read post]
20 Nov 2008, 5:01 am
Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in the consolidated cases of United States v. [read post]
12 Sep 2019, 1:42 pm by Deborah Heller
Part of the explanation for the repeal notes that the 2015 Rule exceeded the authority granted to the agencies by Congress by adopting an interpretation of the “significant nexus” test provided by Justice Kennedy in his concurrence in Rapanos v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 1:08 am
Related posts:US Supreme Court Grants Cert. in BilskiOn Monday, June 1, 2009, the United States Supreme Court granted cert. in Bilski v. [read post]
7 Oct 2007, 6:00 am
United States (06-571) and Stoneridge v. [read post]
19 Sep 2016, 7:53 am by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
Colvin, a case from the Untied States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, claimant applied for disability benefits from the United States Social Security Administration (SSA) in February 2012. [read post]
7 Mar 2024, 10:00 pm
” Since the officers failed to give proper notice of their “purpose” prior to entering the apartment, the AD1 thought the entry was unlawful, and that the New York County Supreme Court should have granted SJ’s motion to suppress the evidence retrieved and that the conviction thus needed to be reversed.That had to be suppressing.# # #DECISIONPeople v Jones [read post]
14 Oct 2008, 2:08 pm
United States (07-10689) is available here. [read post]
3 May 2007, 5:27 am
Today it granted review of two issues in United States v. [read post]
29 Apr 2007, 12:35 pm
The most recent posted grant-and-brief remains United States v. [read post]
3 May 2011, 5:45 am by Michelle Lindo McCluer
Review granted on the following issue:WHETHER AN ARTICLE 134 CLAUSE 1 OR 2 SPECIFICATION THAT FAILS TO EXPRESSLY ALLEGE EITHER POTENTIAL TERMINAL ELEMENT STATES AN OFFENSE UNDER THE SUPREME COURT'S HOLDINGS IN UNITED STATES v. [read post]