Search for: "Miller v. United States District Courts et al"
Results 41 - 60
of 175
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jan 2024, 8:49 pm
A state district court held, after an extensive hearing, that although Trump had “engaged in insurrection” on January 6, 2021, nevertheless he wasn’t subject to Section 3’s disqualification because, inter alia, he had not taken an oath as an “officer of the United States” and, indeed, has never served as an “officer of the United States. [read post]
1 Jul 2007, 11:06 pm
Miller, et al Eastern District of Michigan at DetroitCOBRA; EQUITABLE ESTOPPELBOGGS, Chief Judge. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 6:01 am
United States and Black, et al. [read post]
11 Nov 2020, 8:52 pm
San Francisco Taxi Coalition, et al. v. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 10:23 am
Grant Miller, et al., 547 F. [read post]
7 Feb 2023, 12:07 pm
City of Newark et al. (2021) 74 Cal.App.5th 460 (“Citizens’ Committee”), as summarized in a prior post dated February 8, 2022, which can be found here. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 5:36 pm
United States, 597 F. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 2:44 pm
United States, 464 U.S. 16,23 (1983) (quoting United States v. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 12:49 pm
In comparing the two readings what differences in approaches can one discern between that of equity as practiced outside the United States (in Australia) and in the United States.2. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 8:13 am
And the Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 11:50 am
Planning and Conservation League, et al v. [read post]
1 Mar 2022, 9:13 am
El Dorado Irrigation District, et al. (2022) ___ Cal.App.5th ___. [read post]
16 Jan 2017, 7:11 am
Crislip et al., v. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 4:08 am
See United States v. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 9:56 pm
See Brief for Petitioners 27, Reply Brief 16; Brief for Respondents 43; see also Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 12–13.Teva Pharma. [read post]
12 Sep 2019, 1:02 pm
§ 6021 et seq. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 11:14 am
City of Fremont (Doug Rich, et al., Real Parties in Interest) (2018) ____ Cal.App.5th ____. [read post]
11 Sep 2017, 9:18 am
LUCINDA VINE; KRISTY POND, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.PLS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INCORPORATED; PLS LOAN STORE OF TEXAS, INCORPORATED, Defendants-Appellants.No. 16-50847.United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.Filed May 19, 2017.Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, USDC No. 3:16-CV-31.Before: BARKSDALE, GRAVES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.PER CURIAM.[*]Appellants PLS Financial… [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 4:09 pm
Center for Biological Diversity, et al. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 3:20 pm
Concerned Dublin Citizens, et al. v. [read post]