Search for: "Foote v. Grant"
Results 1701 - 1720
of 1,795
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2008, 6:20 pm
That's when the Forest Service got fed up and put their foot down, so to say. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 12:14 pm
Startzell v. [read post]
23 Jul 2008, 6:11 pm
After one man ran, Timbrook pursued him on foot. [read post]
22 Jul 2008, 12:37 pm
U.S. v. [read post]
21 Jul 2008, 10:53 pm
In Doe v. [read post]
21 Jul 2008, 11:30 am
In his letter ruling granting the plaintiff's motion, Chancellor William B. [read post]
16 Jul 2008, 2:43 pm
In this case, Milgram v. [read post]
13 Jul 2008, 4:50 am
The same test was used in 1959 to strike down an Illinois law requiring trucks to have contoured rear fender mudguards rather than the straight mud guard flaps required by most other states (Bibb v Navajo Freight) and in 1978 to invalidate a Wisconsin law that limited truck length to 55 feet at a time when most long haul truck lines had gone to 65 foot trucks (Raymond Motor Transportation v Rice).In United Haulers Assoc. v Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management… [read post]
9 Jul 2008, 12:30 pm
Pisciotta v. [read post]
8 Jul 2008, 8:31 am
DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKGovernmentNSA Granted Judgment as to Denial of FOIA Request Concerning Warrantless Surveillance Under TSPWilner v. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 2:06 pm
He wanted to display a 12-foot high cross at the celebration. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 3:36 am
On November 9, 2007, Schwab also filed a Petition to StayExecution in the United States Supreme Court in light of theCourt's grant of certiorari in Baze v. [read post]
21 Jun 2008, 10:01 am
Prior to the ruling, however, theUnited States Supreme Court granted Mr. [read post]
9 Jun 2008, 6:15 pm
In granting the federal lands to the State of Hawaii in trust upon its admission into the Union, Congress followed a practice that had evolved from the earliest days of the Union to allow new states to be admitted on an equal footing with existing states. [read post]
7 Jun 2008, 8:43 pm
UM - HIT-AND-RUN - "OCCUPYING" - "VEHICLE-ORIENTED"Faragon v. [read post]
27 May 2008, 4:44 pm
After all, you want to put your best foot forward.But Justice Ikola avoids that temptation here.It's a case that I think will -- and am certain should -- be granted review by the California Supremes, if only due to both the importance of the subject matter and the split in the Court of Appeal. [read post]
25 May 2008, 5:43 am
On the whole, this is not a case calling for an exercise of discretion in favor of granting attorneys' fees.[5] Blanch v. [read post]
19 May 2008, 10:59 pm
So reads the first paragraph of the Appellate Division decision in Prichep v. [read post]
2 May 2008, 6:25 am
In People v. [read post]
24 Apr 2008, 9:14 am
Kirkpatrick v. [read post]
