Search for: "United States v. Grow" Results 141 - 160 of 4,219
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2013, 11:37 am by Jeff Gittins
It is a rare occurrence that the United State Supreme Court hears a case involving water rights. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 7:06 pm by Heidi Meinzer
This would not be the first K-9 case in the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
19 May 2007, 10:12 am
Rather, he invites the State to violate two of the most basic norms of a civilized society - that the State's penal authority be invoked only where necessary to serve the ends of justice, not the ends of a particular individual, and that punishment be imposed only where the State has adequate assurance that the punishment is justified.United States Supreme Court Justice, 1990(1)Robert Comer, Christopher Newton and Elijah Page have something in common, aside… [read post]
11 Nov 2006, 7:15 am
Let's hope that SCO v IBM will finally produce the desired result. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 4:52 am by Lawrence Solum
Though certainly not the only state with such regulations, the United States’ materials support statute risks severely impeding the ability of humanitarian actors to operate during armed conflict, resulting in serious deleterious effects on the civilian population in conflict. [read post]
3 Jun 2020, 8:15 am by John Elwood
Texas and United States v. [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 7:44 am by Aurora Barnes
Maryland, the application of United States v. [read post]
3 Oct 2013, 4:49 am by Steven Gursten
  State Farm has supposedly created units and is investigating these law firms. [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 6:16 am by Jacob Wirz
In the amicus brief, which was filed with the United States Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. [read post]
11 Aug 2007, 8:02 am
Earlier this week, the qui tam case of  United States ex. rel.Louanne Boothe v. [read post]
15 Aug 2022, 12:58 pm by Michael Lowe
  It would try and block its use at the state and local police levels by tying the ability to get federal monies in grant funding to the state agreement to ban use of biometric technology in its jurisdiction. [read post]