Search for: "U. S. v. Kent"
Results 41 - 60
of 119
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Sep 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court next term of Securities and Exchange Commission v. [read post]
20 Dec 2009, 9:34 am
City of Chicago, 394 U. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 6:16 am
Kent State Kent by 14.5 Kent State 24-17 Kent State 28-13 N. [read post]
19 Nov 2010, 9:00 am
Panel One Christopher Buccafusco, Chicago-Kent – Moderator Gregory N. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 7:18 am
It rotates among BC, Chicago-Kent, San Diego, and Kansas, and is typically held in April. [read post]
12 Aug 2021, 8:24 am
Rosen’s article Katcoff v. [read post]
6 Jun 2018, 10:17 am
Thanks once again to Kent Piacenti for compiling these cases. [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 7:19 am
Responding to criticism by Dahlia Lithwick and Lisa McElroy in the New York Times (which Kiera covered in Friday’s round-up), Kent Scheidegger countered at Crime and Consequences that “[u]nexplained denials are, of course, standard operating procedure at the discretionary review stage. [read post]
16 Jun 2019, 11:07 am
I-2 U 31/16). [read post]
5 May 2020, 3:54 am
” At Crime & Consequences, Kent Scheidegger “do[es] not see any plausible argument for retroactivity” in Edwards “[u]nder existing precedent. [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 1:07 pm
In today’s case (Matkin v. [read post]
25 Jun 2021, 6:30 am
Similar to Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in McDonald v. [read post]
20 Nov 2019, 8:49 am
After Professor Sikorski's presentation, I filled in for Kent Baker of u-blox, who wasn't able to travel that week, to give a quick overview of the Continental v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 2:31 pm
See Stanger v. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 9:43 am
Marcus, Assessing Cafa's Stated Jurisdictional Policy, 156 U. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 4:30 am
Kent , ELEVENTH CIRCUIT SURVEY: January 1, 2007 - December 31, 2007: Article: Trial Practice and Procedure, 59 Mercer L. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 7:59 am
Thanks to Bryan U. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 12:57 pm
Kent L. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 7:46 am
On Friday, the Supreme Court stayed the District Court's decision in Trump v. [read post]
