Search for: "United States v. Boots" Results 1 - 20 of 396
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Aug 2011, 6:04 pm by Matthew David Brozik
 — a case about colored outsoles of high-end ladies’ footwear — the Honorable Victor Marrero of the United States District Court for the Southern [...] [read post]
21 Dec 2008, 10:23 am
For example, the decision states that a district court does not have the power to suspend a sentence, citing United States v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 6:48 pm by Steve Vladeck
Three weeks ago, CAAF granted review in United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 12:00 pm by Berry Law Firm
Wilkie case was heard at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit by a full panel of judges (en banc) and that means it has precedential effect (it can be used as law and binding on future issues). [read post]
5 Nov 2012, 8:13 am by Betty S.W. Graumlich
Grubbs moved to dismiss the claims against him, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 8:00 am by Steven G. Pearl
United States Steel Corp., ___ U.S. ___ (1/27/14), the Supreme Court of the United States considered the meaning of the phrase "changing clothes" in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). 29 U.S.C. section 201 et seq. [read post]
6 May 2012, 8:00 pm by Larry
United States is one of those cases.The only real issue in this case is the legal question of whether the tariff term "footwear of the slip-on type, that is held to the foot without the use of laces or buckles or other fasteners" includes UGG Classic Crochet boots. [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 4:06 am
The Ninth Circuit Blog shows all the problems in United States v. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 9:53 am by John Elwood
United States, there are only four cases undecided from the October sitting: United States v. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 7:50 am by Steven Koprince
United States, which is currently scheduled for oral argument on February 22? [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 1:45 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
United States, 431 U.S. 324 (1977), for the notion that individual class members (after a stage I liability finding) are entitled to a presumption that that were discriminated and their individual damages can be heard in mini-trials per Teamsters. [read post]