Search for: "Ide v. United States"
Results 1741 - 1760
of 10,574
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jul 2008, 2:38 pm
In three recent decisions, the New Jersey Supreme Court considered and applied the parameters of the United States Supreme Court case of Crawford v. [read post]
31 Aug 2007, 5:15 am
United States v. [read post]
27 Apr 2021, 3:22 pm
State v. [read post]
26 Mar 2009, 8:07 pm
In a brief opinion, the 11th Circuit found for the government and reversed the district court: In United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2023, 10:59 pm
” See United States v. [read post]
27 May 2015, 3:20 pm
” Id. at 576. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 7:31 pm
On September 3, 2010, IHOP IP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, the owner of various IHOP registered trademarks in the United States, sued the International House of Prayer alleging various trademark infringement theories. [read post]
18 Aug 2006, 7:07 am
See United States v. [read post]
5 Jul 2008, 9:16 pm
United States v. [read post]
28 Nov 2013, 7:40 am
Id. [read post]
24 Aug 2022, 1:08 pm
United States Department of the Interior, et al. [read post]
6 Jul 2016, 2:21 pm
Id. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 11:15 am
Comer Today's brief is of Schall v. [read post]
29 Apr 2012, 9:36 am
On Monday, April 30, 2007, the United States Supreme Court issued its final decision in the matter of KSR v. [read post]
23 Jul 2019, 10:31 am
United States, 290 U.S. 13 (1933) (allowing a property owner to directly bring a Fifth Amendment claim for compensation upon the taking of the property, without pursuing, for example, the state-litigation requirement as contemplated in Williamson County)[13]; First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. [read post]
2 Feb 2014, 6:35 pm
United States v. [read post]
17 Feb 2013, 5:09 pm
United States v. [read post]
9 Aug 2015, 9:04 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2014, 7:45 pm
., Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2017, 3:39 pm
” (To support the nationwide injunction, Washington argued that immigration law had to be uniform; ironically, the state had opposed this exact argument in United States v. [read post]
