Search for: "United States v. California"
Results 1561 - 1580
of 12,650
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Dec 2019, 11:42 am
” The case is Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America et al. v. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 5:51 pm
Berman (D-California) has presented a bill to complement the International Court of Justice’s decision in Mexico v. [read post]
21 Feb 2022, 12:32 pm
—a case certified from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. [read post]
8 Jan 2019, 8:13 pm
United States (9th Cir., Jan. 7, 2019, case no. 18-36082); -United States v. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 11:40 pm
The court cited multiple United States Courts of Appeals cases: First, in Hastie v. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 1:25 pm
In a foreshadowing of United States v. [read post]
12 May 2022, 4:48 am
California already bars anyone on a state payroll (including yours truly, who teaches at UC Berkeley) from getting reimbursed for travel to states that discriminate against LGBTQ+ people. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 8:53 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2019, 10:08 am
United States (Federal Taxation) Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 8:47 am
”In United States v. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 3:42 pm
June 12, 1942, an Information was filed in the District Court for Northern California charging a violation of the Act of March 21, 1942, in that petitioner had knowingly remained within the area covered by Exclusion Order No. 34. [read post]
21 Feb 2017, 3:42 pm
June 12, 1942, an Information was filed in the District Court for Northern California charging a violation of the Act of March 21, 1942, in that petitioner had knowingly remained within the area covered by Exclusion Order No. 34. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 3:42 pm
June 12, 1942, an Information was filed in the District Court for Northern California charging a violation of the Act of March 21, 1942, in that petitioner had knowingly remained within the area covered by Exclusion Order No. 34. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 9:37 am
Sanders v. [read post]
18 Aug 2020, 9:20 pm
That is not a surprise because outside of the United States, most people refer to antitrust law as competition law. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 8:42 am
While that decision may well be challenged before the California Supreme Court, it only underscores how California employees have an avenue to try to avoid the impact of United States Supreme Court decisions regarding class actions – PAGA claims. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 11:44 am
Peña v. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 11:07 am
United States of America (C.D.Cal. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 2:52 pm
” After its thorough analysis, the court declared “(1) that the Australian Injunction is repugnant to the United States Constitution and the laws of California and the Unites States; and (2) that the Australian injunction cannot be recognized or enforced in the United States. [read post]
10 May 2012, 4:30 am
Mireles v. [read post]
