Search for: "King v. United States"
Results 1861 - 1880
of 3,017
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Sep 2012, 2:50 am
" Without further comment, here is Breytman v Schechter ; 2011 NY Slip Op 51375(U) ; Supreme Court, Kings County Schack, J. [read post]
8 Sep 2012, 8:53 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 11:06 am
White, Partner at King & Spalding in Atlanta. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 8:26 am
One short year after publication, in 2010, Anti-Corruption Principle was relied upon by Justice Stevens in his Citizens United v. [read post]
2 Sep 2012, 12:22 pm
See United States v. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 6:23 am
Johnson and United States v. [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 3:15 am
United States, 110 F.3d 780 (Fed. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 5:27 pm
, pp. 29-34(6) Ivan Hare Measuring Media Plurality in the United Kingdo [read post]
27 Aug 2012, 8:41 pm
United States standard). [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 8:34 am
It has been rendered the solemn duty of the Supreme Court of the United States, laid upon it by Congress in pursuance of the Federal Government’s power “[t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,” U.S. [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 2:48 pm
See, United States v. [read post]
17 Aug 2012, 4:42 am
At Wired, David Kravets examines the Fourth Circuit’s recent decision holding that impersonating a police officer is not speech protected under the First Amendment in light of the Court’s recent holding in United States v. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 11:45 am
The Fourth Amendment tipping point was marked this term by United States v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 10:44 am
Marbury v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
” Although they conceded that the purchase and sale of the shares took place outside the United States, the plaintiffs alleged that the Exchange Act still reached their claims under two theories: 1) the purchase was “in connection with” trades made in the United States; and 2) the defendants’ investments constituted an “economic reality” of trades made in the United States. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
” Although they conceded that the purchase and sale of the shares took place outside the United States, the plaintiffs alleged that the Exchange Act still reached their claims under two theories: 1) the purchase was “in connection with” trades made in the United States; and 2) the defendants’ investments constituted an “economic reality” of trades made in the United States. [read post]
12 Aug 2012, 4:00 pm
” But putting that aside, I think the far more significant point for present purposes is how inconsistent the Fourth Circuit’s analysis of Brehm’s contacts is with the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces’ analysis in United States v. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
United States Surgical Corp. [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 8:19 pm
” Premo v. [read post]
