Search for: "United States v. Minnesota" Results 121 - 140 of 1,644
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Mar 2012, 12:08 pm by Paul Caron
United States held that general authority Treasury regulations adopted using notice-and-comment... [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 1:25 pm by Paul Caron
United States, No. 09-837 (Jan. 11, 2011), the Supreme Court has finally and decisively rejected the notion of tax exceptionalism in judicial review standards. [read post]
5 Jun 2016, 8:39 pm by Consuella Pachico
Supreme Court ruled in, United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 3:00 am by Chip Merlin
The United States Supreme Court held in the 1931 case of Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. [read post]
28 Apr 2018, 6:02 am by Mark S. Humphreys
That was the issue in the March 2018, opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 7:09 pm by Jason C. Brown
Massachusetts was the first state in the United States to allow same-sex marriage with the Goodridge v. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
Categories of Unprotected Speech The Minnesota law at issue in State of Minnesota v. [read post]
28 May 2019, 2:00 am by DONALD SCARINCI
The court rejected Herrera’s argument that the Supreme Court’s subsequent decision in Minnesota v. [read post]
16 Jun 2012, 4:05 am
Issue: “Should Article 1, Section 10, of the Minnesota Constitution be interpreted to require individualized probable cause of a code violation in a particular building, as a prerequisite to the issuance of an administrative search warrant, even though that position was rejected by the United States Supreme Court when it interpreted the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution 45 years ago? [read post]
21 Sep 2011, 8:01 pm by John Fossum
Constitution says that no person “shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself” In State v. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 2:25 am
BNA's Feb. 20 Daily Report for Executives [subscription required] discusses the options available to the Internal Revenue Service after the Minnesota federal district court decision last month in United States v. [read post]