Search for: "Phillips v. United States" Results 701 - 720 of 1,065
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2015, 8:15 am by Don Cruse
STATE OF TEXAS, No. 14-0226 Disposed on orders list of May 8, 2015 CITY OF DALLAS v. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am by Bexis
  Comment k could correspond to Led Zeppelin, and state of the art might be The Who.And it seems that, for each of these bands, there’s a song we really like that gets slighted (in our opinion) when it comes to air time on classic rock stations. [read post]
10 May 2011, 4:43 pm by Christa Culver
Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc.Docket: 10-778Issue(s): Whether the court of appeals correctly affirmed the lower court’s dismissal at the pleading stage, based on the evidentiary state secrets privilege, of a suit seeking compensation for the petitioners' unlawful abduction, arbitrary detention, and torture.Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (9th Circuit)Petition for certiorariBrief in opposition for the United States Brief in opposition for respondent Jeppesen… [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 3:14 pm
It is undisputed that Honeywell performed this work in the United States prior to Solvay's priority date of October 23, 1995. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 11:02 pm
United States, 265 F.3d 1371, 1375 (Fed. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 11:44 am by Jack McNeill, Associate Library Director
Application of the remedial purpose canon to CERCLA successor liability issues after United States v. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 8:14 pm by Wolfgang Demino
§ 4102.051(a) (providing that "[a] person may not act as a public insurance adjuster in this state or hold himself or herself out to be a public insurance adjuster in this state unless the person holds a license issued by the commissioner"). [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 8:14 pm by Wolfgang Demino
§ 4102.051(a) (providing that "[a] person may not act as a public insurance adjuster in this state or hold himself or herself out to be a public insurance adjuster in this state unless the person holds a license issued by the commissioner"). [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 4:45 am by Edith Roberts
United States, the court held that a trial court can consider mandatory minimums for possessing firearms when sentencing a defendant for an underlying drug offense. [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 6:15 am
Three justices (you need four for an outright majority) agreed in a concurring opinion in Phillips v. [read post]
25 Jul 2020, 12:21 am by Josh Blackman
Two months ago, the Supreme Court decided a similar case, South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. [read post]
13 May 2014, 1:08 pm
” Three federal judges have already found this statute unconstitutional (see Vives v the City of New York, 305 F Supp 2d 289, 299 [SD NY 2003, Scheindlin, J.], revd on other grounds 405 F3d 115 [2d Cir 2004] ["where speech is regulated or proscribed based on its content, the scope of the effected speech must be clearly defined"]; see also Vives 405 F3d 115, 123-124 [2d Cir 2004, Cardamone, J., dissenting in part, concurring in part] [Penal Law § 240.30(1)… [read post]