Search for: "United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota"
Results 1 - 20
of 742
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Apr 2007, 2:28 pm
Yesterday, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota entered its final order in the Milavetz case, granting the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and declaring that:1. [read post]
22 May 2012, 8:16 pm
Fossum is admitted to practice in state and federal courts in Minnesota, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, the United States Supreme Court, the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. [read post]
15 Mar 2013, 1:14 pm
Attorney for the District of Minnesota B. [read post]
24 Aug 2012, 7:32 am
On August 7, 2012, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota officially dismissed the claims against Accretive pursuant to the stipulation of dismissal that was filed along with the settlement agreement. [read post]
24 Aug 2012, 7:32 am
On August 7, 2012, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota officially dismissed the claims against Accretive pursuant to the stipulation of dismissal that was filed along with the settlement agreement. [read post]
6 Sep 2023, 11:15 am
Divorce is fairly mainstream in the United States today. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 9:57 pm
The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota has circulated for public comment proposed changes to Local Rule 83.5. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 9:57 pm
The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota has circulated for public comment proposed changes to Local Rule 83.5. [read post]
3 May 2018, 5:37 am
The crimes were described by the United States Attorney's Office for the District... [read post]
30 Jan 2021, 7:05 am
In an order dated January 11, Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter Cahill ruled that the first trial, State v. [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 3:38 pm
As reported by The United States Attorney’s Office District of Minnesota, it is alleged Wolf and Olson defrauded grain purchasers by selling them non-GMO grains falsely labeled as “organic. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 7:30 pm
On March 1, the United States Attorney’s office for the District of Minnesota obtained a jury verdict for $43 million in a whistleblower lawsuit that alleged that an ophthalmic products company paid kickbacks to surgeons to use its products. [read post]
23 May 2023, 1:49 pm
” “This judgment affirms Congress’ intent to hold individuals and companies accountable when they use illegal kickbacks to defraud federal healthcare programs,” said Bahram Samie, Deputy Civil Chief for the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Minnesota. [read post]
12 Jul 2016, 4:24 pm
On May 31, 2016, the Supreme Court decided United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 11:23 am
The question before the Supreme Court is whether the United States Army Corps of Engineers’ determination that the property at issue contains “waters of the United States” protected by the Clean Water Act, constitutes “final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court," and is, therefore, subject to judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 4:17 pm
Fossum is an experienced and trial and appellate lawyer, having tried cases in state court in Minnesota, and the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 11:43 am
Both the United States and Minnesota constitutions provide that no warrant shall issue absent a showing of probable cause. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 4:53 pm
The report said that state and national standards call for public defenders to carry no more than 400 case units per year. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 4:17 pm
Fossum is an experienced and trial and appellate lawyer, having tried cases in state court in Minnesota, and the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota. [read post]
27 Oct 2015, 12:21 pm
On October 23, 2015, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, in large part, upheld Target’s assertion of the attorney-client privilege and work-product protections for information associated with a privileged, internal investigation of Target’s 2013 data breach. [read post]
