Search for: "U S v. PETIT"
Results 221 - 240
of 1,708
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Aug 2022, 5:18 pm
The court found that the company’s executives knew they were reporting higher U&C prices. [read post]
25 May 2021, 5:01 am
In Johnson v. [read post]
30 Nov 2022, 5:17 am
In Matter of Brady S v Darla B, the court was asked to decide whether it was in the best interests of the child to award sole custody to the grandparents or to the child’s father. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 6:01 am
In Chicago v. [read post]
4 May 2018, 4:45 am
Among such cases is CFPB v. [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 2:01 pm
The Solicitor General filed the government’s petition for a writ of certiorari on October 5, 2023. [read post]
28 May 2009, 4:11 am
Selection of one of available alternative remedies provided by the State's Human Right Law bars recourse to the otherTierney v Patchogue Fire Dept. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 6:32 pm
S. ___ (2008) (slip op., at 36) (quoting Marbury v. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 7:54 am
S. 516, 530 (1945); see also Wayte v. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 10:44 am
s interest in real property), petition for cert. filed, 80 U.S.L.W. 3135 (U.S. [read post]
24 Jan 2022, 8:40 am
Thompson, 595 U. [read post]
16 May 2016, 5:23 pm
He wrote: This petition asks the Court to overrule Auer v. [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 12:16 pm
Some of these cases very likely will appear later in the blog's Petitions to Watch feature when the Court is ready to consider them. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 5:30 pm
Check the Dillon v. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 7:30 am
Supreme Court granted the City's motion to dismiss the Chief's petition, agreeing with the City that the Chief's Article 78 action was moot. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 7:30 am
Supreme Court granted the City's motion to dismiss the Chief's petition, agreeing with the City that the Chief's Article 78 action was moot. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 11:59 am
Altmann, 541 U. [read post]
30 Mar 2023, 5:36 am
New York, 445 U. [read post]
10 Mar 2021, 9:23 am
There might be an "anomaly" in treatment of S. 8 petitions and S. 11 petitions insofar as appeal is concerned but that does not mean that an amendment has to be carried out. [read post]
11 Jan 2008, 9:53 am
Reynolds, "Second or Successive" Habeas Petitions and Late-Ripening Claims after Panetti v Quarterman, 74 U Chi L Rev 1475 (2007) Bryson Santaguida, The Primary Jurisdiction Two-Step, 74 U Chi L Rev 1517 (2007) Sloan G. [read post]