Search for: "PARKER v. UNITED STATES"
Results 561 - 580
of 827
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm
See paras 23 – 29 of R (English UK Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 1726 for a further explanation of the workings of PBS. [read post]
9 Apr 2011, 2:46 pm
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 6:08 pm
See United States v. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 4:12 am
United States v. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 9:06 pm
United States v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 9:01 am
LGBTKF4754.5 .K59Gay and lesbian elders : history, law, and identity politics in the United States / Nancy J. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 7:51 am
Patent No. 5,643,446 entitled FUEL FILTER AND PRIMING PUMP and owned by Parker-Hannifan. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 7:51 am
Patent No. 5,643,446 entitled FUEL FILTER AND PRIMING PUMP and owned by Parker-Hannifan. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 6:53 am
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division recently issued an opnion on a case where the 60 day notice provision of Texas Insurance Code, Section 541.154. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 7:44 am
CaldwellDocket: 10-622Issue(s): (1) Whether a binding agreement among multiple states and private companies is immunized from antitrust scrutiny under the state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 9:11 am
United StatesDocket: 10-516Issue(s): Whether an essential element to be proven for a conviction for the offense of bribery of a state or local official under 18 U.S.C. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 1:34 pm
Caldwell (relisted after 2/25 Conference) Docket: 10-622 Issue(s): (1) Whether a binding agreement among multiple states and private companies is immunized from antitrust scrutiny under the state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. [read post]
26 Feb 2011, 8:23 am
(internal quotation marks omitted)); Parker v. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 1:26 pm
CaldwellDocket: 10-622Issue(s): (1) Whether a binding agreement among multiple states and private companies is immunized from antitrust scrutiny under the state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 7:23 am
The abuse of eminent domain in the United States is at least as old as the U.S. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 3:44 am
In this case, the Second Circuit upholds the preclusion of evidence (an illegal gun) because the search violated the Fourth Amendment.The case is United States v. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 8:58 am
The defense is that (1) the MSA is not a compact requiring congressional approval under the leading modern case, Parker v. [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 4:19 pm
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 7:47 am
United States v. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 9:56 pm
I highly favour the role of an “IP coordinator,” and I am pleased that the United States went in this direction. [read post]
