Search for: "United States v. Clay" Results 61 - 80 of 297
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jul 2019, 3:30 pm by Renee Anderson
The volume’s editors (Arizona State University’s David H. [read post]
15 Jun 2019, 1:01 am by rhapsodyinbooks
The Missouri Compromise of 1820, engineered largely by Henry Clay, temporarily settled the issue of where slavery would be permitted in the United States, establishing the Mason-Dixon Line as the boundary between free and slave states. [read post]
2 Jun 2019, 7:11 am by Ben Allen
  The District Court denied his motion, finding that the warrant was supported by probable cause, and, even if it was not so supported, the Leon good faith exception applied.In United States v. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 7:16 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Law, cultural heritage, and climate change in the United States. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 6:30 pm by Cathi Adinaro
United States, 559 U.S. 196 (2010). [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 6:21 am by Matthew Scott Johnson
Robert Sherwin’s article Ambiguity in Anti-SLAPP Law and Frivolous Litigation is cited in the following article: George Wyeth et al., The Impact of Citizen Environmental Science in the United States, 49 ELR 10237 (2019). 5. [read post]
11 Mar 2019, 11:44 am by Eric Goldman
  (A “United States work” is a work first published in the United States, or simultaneously published in the United States and any foreign country; or an unpublished work (or a work first published in a nation with whom the United States does not have a copyright treaty) for which all authors are citizens of or domiciled in the United States. [read post]
5 Oct 2018, 1:30 pm by John K. Ross
United States, which presents the Court with a chance to reconsider. [read post]
23 Sep 2018, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
The review examines the overall state of the domestic news market, its financial sustainability, the role of digital advertising and social media. [read post]
20 Jun 2018, 4:10 am by Edith Roberts
United States, in which the court held on Monday that a decision not to grant a proportional sentence reduction does not require a detailed written explanation. [read post]