Search for: "Davies v. United States"
Results 1501 - 1520
of 2,778
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Sep 2013, 10:29 am
Davis and Personnel Administrator v. [read post]
16 Jun 2021, 12:19 pm
” Davis v. [read post]
15 Apr 2017, 3:55 am
” Meredith v. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 7:02 am
Davis, 116 N.J. 341, 361 (1989), superseded by constitutional amendment and statute on other grounds, as recognized in State v. [read post]
7 May 2012, 2:12 pm
United States. [read post]
7 Oct 2009, 9:38 am
Lipsett v. [read post]
27 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
The court invoked language from the Supreme Court’s 1968 decision in United States v. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 4:15 am
Stone, 2 Cir., 429 F.2d 138, 140; United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 9:56 am
” In the denial of the cellphone tower data case (Davis v. [read post]
15 Mar 2007, 12:40 pm
On appeal Miller argues that the state appellate court unreasonably concluded that McShane's performance at sentencing was not deficient or prejudicial, and he further contends that United States v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 9:19 am
Davis, a case decided in 2001. [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 8:39 am
Eleven years ago, Patti Shaw was arrested by the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) in D.C. and held in the custody of both the MPD and the United States Marshal's Service (USMS). [read post]
31 Jul 2016, 12:00 am
In the London Review of Books, but behind a paywall, are a review of Entick v. [read post]
9 Nov 2020, 7:35 am
United States v. [read post]
26 Aug 2010, 3:45 am
Washington and Davis v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 2:56 pm
The Court also denied cert. in Davis v. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 7:34 pm
Davis, 237 N.C. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 6:15 am
In addition, the Court has rescheduled Davis v. [read post]
10 Oct 2024, 2:05 pm
United States. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 9:01 pm
United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 8, is significant because: (1) it involves a dispute over some fundamental but complex First Amendment doctrinal principles; (2) it conflicts with a case from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; and (3) (for reasons 1 and 2), it may very well end up in the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
