Search for: "US v. Williamson" Results 201 - 220 of 838
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Nov 2013, 12:13 pm
  First of all, the position was unprecedented:[N]o court has ever found that a product is “intended for use” or “intended to affect” within the meaning of the FDCA absent manufacturer claims as to that product’s use.Id. at 417 (quoting Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. [read post]
19 Jun 2007, 9:00 pm
  The federal district court dismissed the complaint because it was not "ripe" for review under Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 6:41 am by Amanda Rice
The Court also heard argument in Williamson v. [read post]
2 Nov 2015, 11:45 am by Rob McKinney
Williamson County, Tennessee is the primary county where search warrants are used all the time. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 11:15 am by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
In a decision issued this morning in Williamson v. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 9:47 am by Daniel Nazer
Today EFF filed an amicus brief on this issue in a case called Williamson v. [read post]
20 Feb 2009, 11:00 am
California Coastal Comm'n (cert petition on Williamson County and Penn Central) Aspen Creek Estates, Ltd. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 1:11 pm by Daniel E. Cummins
In the MonroeCounty decision by Judge David Williamson in the case of Martz v. [read post]
26 Sep 2009, 5:54 pm
The case has already resulted in one reported decision in which the court of appeal reversed the district court's holding that the plaintiffs' public use challenge was subject to Williamson County's ripeness requirements. [read post]