Search for: "Fish v. United States" Results 21 - 40 of 1,835
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jun 2022, 5:36 am by Bernard Bell
A group of charter boat captains and owners challenged the regulation, Mexican Gulf Fishing v. [read post]
18 May 2010, 5:44 pm by John Inazu
Three weeks ago, Stanley Fish's essay "The First Amendment and Kittens" reflected on the Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. [read post]
21 Sep 2022, 4:18 pm
Baker (1818) 16 U.S. 541, 545); quite recently, it determined that a fish is not a “tangible object” (United States v. [read post]
19 Apr 2018, 8:02 am by Miriam Seifter
United States, the Supreme Court debated the scope of tribal fishing rights under 19th century treaties between the United States and northwest Indian tribes. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 8:44 am by Amy Howe
The first opinion this morning came in United States v. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 10:11 am by Calvin Massey
United States, in which a plurality concluded that a fish is not a tangible object, at least for purposes of criminal liability under the Sarbanes-Oxley act? [read post]
25 May 2010, 3:51 am by Gregory Forman
 Ditto for the forty United States Supreme Court opinions referencing the term. [read post]
24 Jan 2018, 1:49 pm by Mark L. McNamara
On January 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court granted review of the Petitioner’s writ of certiorari in Weyerhaeuser Co. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 3:10 pm by James M. Beard
Building the F/V American Finest in the United States was a feel good story about supporting American shipbuilding and the American fisheries. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 3:10 pm by James M. Beard
Building the F/V American Finest in the United States was a feel good story about supporting American shipbuilding and the American fisheries. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 1:45 pm by WIMS
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. [read post]
25 Feb 2015, 12:54 pm by Walter Olson
United States that the Sarbanes-Oxley accounting law’s prohibition on evasive destruction of “tangible objects” cannot be used to prosecute a fisherman who discarded undersized grouper in hopes of avoiding enforcement. [read post]