Search for: "Garner v. United States"
Results 201 - 220
of 964
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
As a result of their disagreements, the IRC submitted, as a first set of maps, two proposed redistricting plans to the legislature — maps from each party delegation — as is constitutionally permitted if a single consensus map fails to garner sufficient votes (see NY Const, art III, § 5-b [g]). [read post]
26 Dec 2017, 9:30 am
The court supported this argument with a citation to United States v. [read post]
6 Nov 2022, 3:23 am
Miss United States of America [read post]
14 Aug 2014, 3:32 pm
As she argues, in Little Rock in the 1950s, the "image of American democracy was at stake:" "foreign critics questioned how the United States could argue that its democratic system of government was a model for others to follow when racial segregation was tolerated in the nation. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 9:03 am
United States by Peter Spiro. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 11:27 am
At Tuesday’s oral argument in United Student Aid Funds v. [read post]
3 May 2024, 10:48 am
" United States v. [read post]
24 May 2011, 7:34 am
Yesterday’s decision in General Dynamics garnered comparatively less coverage. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 7:18 am
” The form of virtual currency in the United State that has garnered the most notice is Bitcoin. [read post]
15 Jul 2007, 9:37 am
United States v. [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 7:05 am
United States and United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 2:39 pm
§ 227 Unsolicited Advertisement Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 1:08 pm
United States, 430 U.S. 188, 193 (1977). [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 6:00 am
Judge Clement first analyzed and concluded that United States Supreme Court jurisprudence does not require punitive damages in unseaworthiness cases. [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 8:58 pm
In United States v. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 2:17 pm
Citizens United v. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 7:05 am
In South Africa v. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 8:04 pm
The following case provides some guidance.When the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts considered this issue, it decided to take into account several factors, including (1) "stigma," i.e public fear of potential hazards (even exaggerated fears based on misinformation) and (2) the possible additional construction expenses and the "administrative hassle" of having to abide by the company's rules. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 8:04 pm
The following case provides some guidance.When the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts considered this issue, it decided to take into account several factors, including (1) "stigma," i.e public fear of potential hazards (even exaggerated fears based on misinformation) and (2) the possible additional construction expenses and the "administrative hassle" of having to abide by the company's rules. [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 9:30 pm
We focus first on the landmark 1813 case Queen v. [read post]
