Search for: "P. v. Booker"
Results 61 - 80
of 119
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Dec 2011, 12:40 pm
Jackson v. [read post]
22 Sep 2011, 9:23 am
Jonathan P. [read post]
13 Jan 2008, 4:47 pm
OpinionShort Title/District 08a0004p.06 Staunch v. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 12:18 pm
Pincus, Raymond P. [read post]
20 Jul 2021, 9:01 am
A recent decision in the case of Huffman v. [read post]
6 Apr 2011, 2:19 am
Pass. clayton v clayton – does it still apply? [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 1:51 pm
§ 994(o) and (p). [read post]
10 Jul 2006, 9:41 am
In doing so the Court noted that under U.S. v. [read post]
25 Nov 2018, 10:53 am
P. 35(f). [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 7:35 pm
The full opinion in United States v. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 1:55 pm
Booker, 2010 U.S. [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 7:22 am
Ahn, 165 P.3d 581 (Cal. 2007). [read post]
3 Oct 2018, 11:26 am
§ 1396a(p), indicate that Congress clearly and unambiguously intended to create an implied private right of action to challenge a state’s determination that a provider is not “qualified” under the applicable state regulations. [read post]
10 Oct 2018, 11:28 am
§ 1396a(p), indicate that Congress clearly and unambiguously intended to create an implied private right of action to challenge a state’s determination that a provider is not “qualified” under the applicable state regulations. [read post]
22 Dec 2007, 7:31 am
Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). [read post]
2 Feb 2010, 12:17 pm
Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005); Crawford v. [read post]
19 Nov 2007, 5:45 am
State, 769 So. 2d at 986 .................................................................................................................7 Booker v. [read post]
19 Nov 2007, 5:45 am
State, 769 So. 2d at 986 .................................................................................................................7 Booker v. [read post]
11 Jun 2011, 9:31 am
See Scott v. [read post]
31 Jan 2009, 3:24 pm
Comcast Corp., 446 F.3d 25 (1st Cir. 2006) (antitrust); Booker v. [read post]
