Search for: "Ballard v. United States" Results 41 - 60 of 62
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Aug 2012, 2:35 pm by Mark Zamora
Ballard, 266 Ga. 408 (2), 467 S.E.2d 891 (1996); Worthy v. [read post]
9 May 2012, 6:17 am by Rob Robinson (Tom Schober) IT and Legal Perspectives on Data Security - (Stacy Jackson) IP: Examining the Risks Associated with Corporate Social Media Use – (Marcella Ballard, Deborah Feinblum) Keeping Secrets on Facebook - (Somini Sengupta) Lawyers and Social Media: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?  [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 7:49 pm by Kevin Funnell
United States, which requires the government to prove that discrimination was so pervasive within the defendant’s operations that “racial discrimination was the company’s standard operating procedure.” [read post]
22 May 2011, 6:59 am
The leading Supreme Court case, United States v. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 10:00 am by Ken Chan
Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 3:32 pm by Joe Mullin
“They are the patent examiners....They are paid by the United States of America. [read post]
27 Oct 2009, 12:17 pm
  Without proof of such allegations, I would think any prosecution for fraud in this country would violate the First Amendment under an old case, United States v. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 11:34 am
Rodriguez-Amaya, No. 06-4514 Conviction for unlawful reentry after deportation by an aggravated felon is affirmed where the time defendant was detained by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement on administrative charges pending his removal was not detention "in connection with" his arrest, thus defendant's indictment did not violate the Speedy Trial Act. [read post]
27 Feb 2008, 12:30 am
The shift in strategy resulted in much of the firm's growth in 2007 coming out of the western United States. [read post]
10 Oct 2007, 1:04 am
Ballard Spahr Fails to Halt Gender Discrimination Claim The Legal Intelligencer Ballard Spahr has lost its attempt to halt a partner's gender discrimination claim before it began. [read post]
18 Jul 2007, 9:02 am
United States 54 USPQ2d 1519, 1530 (Ct. [read post]