Search for: "United States v. Green" Results 1281 - 1300 of 2,913
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Aug 2008, 5:39 pm
Deeds not words: Let's have some action on prisoners voting rightsRobert Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what plans he has to extend voting rights to sentenced prisoners in England and Wales. [218573]Bridget Prentice: Following the European Court of Human Rights' judgment in the case of Hirst v. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 7:46 pm by Kirk Jenkins
In state and Federal courts throughout the country, the defense and plaintiffs’ bars are debating the application of the United States Supreme Court’s landmark 2011 decision in AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 12:46 pm by Mark Walsh
United States, which holds that in a prosecution under a federal statute that prohibits certain categories of people from possessing firearms, the government must prove that the defendant knew he possessed a firearm and that he knew he belonged to the relevant category. [read post]
4 May 2010, 4:02 pm by Anna Christensen
In response, the PHS personnel filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that Section 233(a) provides them with absolute immunity from Bivens actions by making a suit against the United States under the FTCA the exclusive remedy for the injuries to Castaneda. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 10:21 am
Patrick's Day in United States v. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 4:11 am by Edith Roberts
” Also in an op-ed for The Hill, Ashley Baker urges the court to “be particularly cognizant of the potential for judicial overreach” in United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2022, 3:11 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
NAC was found liable on a breach of contract claim in an underlying action against it in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 2:58 pm
  As Wikipedia noteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Text , the 4thAmendment establishes that “the people” of the United States are constitutionally protected against “unreasonable” searches and seizures. [read post]