Search for: "United States v. Close"
Results 1381 - 1400
of 14,188
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jun 2024, 11:07 am
Lozano v. [read post]
31 Oct 2006, 5:52 am
Celebrezze v. [read post]
26 Aug 2009, 1:31 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Nov 2012, 7:00 am
United States v. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 9:00 am
In the recent decision of United States v. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 4:55 pm
For example, there’s United States v. [read post]
22 Mar 2017, 3:00 am
Schartz v Parish, 2016 WL 7231613 (N.D. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 8:51 am
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is now set to consider on January 9 whether to grant review of any or all of the second round of same-sex marriage cases to reach it in the wake of widespread activity in lower courts since the Justices last spoke on the rights of same-sex couples in United States v. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 6:22 am
In a unanimous decision penned by Justice Stephen Breyer, the United States Supreme Court last week closed a loophole in the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) that had been used by plaintiffs’ lawyers to avoid removal of class actions to federal court. [read post]
28 Feb 2021, 6:33 pm
by Dennis Crouch United States v. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 9:04 am
The United States is vested with full authority to bring an action for reimbursement, not the Secretary. 42 U.S.C. [read post]
12 Jun 2011, 7:16 am
United States v. [read post]
14 Dec 2019, 12:01 am
In Shelby County v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 12:07 pm
United States v. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 8:12 am
The action is filed as “United States v. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 2:06 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 8:45 am
However, after a year in the United States, the mother sought dissolution of the marriage and custody of the children in California state court. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 1:25 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 10:43 pm
While a few regulatory decisions are still outstanding, the Microsoft-ActivisionBlizzard merger review process now comes down to the United Kingdom and the United States. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 6:28 am
To do so otherwise would be to subject these individual legal entities to binding legal outcomes without first being afforded due process which is a protected right under the Constitution of the United States. [read post]
