Search for: "Robert Thomas Quick v. the United States" Results 81 - 97 of 97
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Jul 2010, 11:07 am by R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
Shaw for Amici Curiae Bank of America and BAC Home Loans Servicingon behalf of Real Parties in Interest.Wright, Finlay & Zak, Thomas Robert Finlay and Jennifer A. [read post]
29 May 2010, 6:33 am by thejaghunter
Quick, Linden, MI ET3 Christopher DeAngelis, † Dumont, NJ GMM1 Thomas J. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 6:09 am by Kenneth Anderson
I’ve refrained so far from commenting on the Liz Cheney — AQ7 ad, but I want to make one lengthy statement on it and, I hope, leave it at that. [read post]
29 Jan 2010, 7:54 am by Anna Christensen
   ABC News quotes University of Texas law professor Lucas Powe, who speculates that the Justices will likely opt not to attend the State of the Union address next year, while Robert Barnes, writing for the Washington Post, points out that each Justice chooses whether to attend the State of the Union address each year (this year, Justices Stevens, Scalia, and Thomas all skipped the speech). [read post]
13 Dec 2009, 8:58 pm by smtaber
— Christopher Joyce, National Public Radio, December 7, 2009 The United States has all the tools it needs to replace its old coal energy economy and drastically cut greenhouse emissions. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 10:43 am
And what to make of Justice Thomas’s dissent? [read post]
29 May 2009, 8:43 am
Perhaps the most significant criminal case in our collection was United States v. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 12:31 am
A quick overview of the restaurant industry reveals that it is one of the largest and most profitable industries in the United States. [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 7:21 pm
J. 875 (2007), which is generally about KSR v. [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 1:13 am
Almost immediately after the May 29 decision in Ledbetter v. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 10:00 am
Justice Scalia, joined by Justice Thomas, dissented. [read post]
30 Nov 2006, 10:11 am
Hungar, Deputy Solicitor General, argued next on behalf of the United States as an amicus in support of petitioner. [read post]