Search for: "United States v. Corr"
Results 41 - 60
of 71
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2012, 2:00 am
On the same date HHJ Parkes QC heard a “Norwich Pharmacal” application in the case of Patel v Unite. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 5:07 am
.In many merger cases, the contribution of antitrust law begins and ends in the United States Department of Justice. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V A. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 5:41 pm
United States District Court, D. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 7:35 am
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has noted this divide, but not staked out its position. [read post]
19 Sep 2010, 7:40 pm
United States.. . . [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 2:57 am
United States v. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 3:38 am
HART, CPA; and MOORE & HART, CPA, 6:09-CV-920;UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK; 2010 U.S. [read post]
9 May 2010, 9:14 pm
United States v. [read post]
2 May 2010, 1:12 pm
United States v. [read post]
6 Apr 2010, 4:33 am
United States v. [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 5:04 am
Dep't of Corr. v. [read post]
8 May 2009, 10:02 am
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINAIn The Court of AppealsRobert Guinan, Appellant, v. [read post]
4 May 2009, 1:57 am
Last Act: 04/27/09 REFERRED TO CHILDREN AND FAMILIESS4872
FOLEY -- Provides procedures for resolution of disputes between a public employer and Suffolk county probation officers Same as A 7171-A BLURB : Civ Serv. res ds Sflk Cty pk polLast Act: 04/27/09 REFERRED TO CIVIL SERVICE & PENSIONSS4890
NOZZOLIO -- Provides for binding arbitration for security services collective bargaining unit members who are warrant and transfer officers in the division of parole No Same… [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 6:45 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 1:26 pm
Sentence is remanded for resentencing in light of Amendment 709 to the United States Sentencing Guideline U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, March 19, 2009 US v. [read post]
19 Mar 2009, 12:47 pm
Calif. 2006) may have summed up the overall state of the law best - "Article I of the United States Constitution provides that neither Congress nor any state shall pass an ex post facto law. [read post]
3 Oct 2008, 11:58 am
United States v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 6:15 pm
However, district courts may not exercise their habeas jurisdiction to enjoin the United States from transferring individuals alleged to have committed crimes and detained within the territory of a foreign sovereign to that sovereign's government for criminal prosecution. [read post]
