Search for: "United States v. Daugherty"
Results 21 - 40
of 50
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Aug 2019, 3:19 pm
Daugherty and Watkins v. [read post]
5 May 2019, 8:18 am
From 1968 to 1971, he served in the United States Army, including a tour in Vietnam. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 2:40 pm
Supp. 51 (D.D.C. 1973) (holding that the $10,000 jurisdictional amount in controversy requirement then in the statute (it's since been eliminated) was not satisfied); United States v. [read post]
20 Jun 2018, 4:10 am
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]
2 Dec 2013, 9:36 am
But see United States v. [read post]
7 Nov 2018, 12:44 pm
United States that “the President has the exclusive authority to remove executive branch officials. [read post]
7 Feb 2009, 5:48 pm
United States v. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 10:03 am
Hill was a member of the bargaining unit covered by the CBA. [read post]
16 May 2018, 8:07 am
Clemons v. [read post]
21 May 2019, 1:53 pm
United States as permitting “Congress to inquire into and publicize corruption, maladministration or inefficiency in agencies of the Government. [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 8:04 am
Trump v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 3:22 pm
From the Complaint in Mucaj v. [read post]
28 Feb 2018, 4:13 am
The first was United States v. [read post]
27 Jul 2023, 2:19 pm
United States v. [read post]
8 Nov 2006, 9:25 am
State of Indiana (NFP) Suzanne Prentiss v. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 11:49 am
As the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in United States v. [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 3:15 am
United States that “the President has the exclusive authority to remove executive branch officials. [read post]
23 Sep 2011, 8:21 am
Cal. 2011) (arbitration class action dismissed); Daugherty v. [read post]
13 May 2020, 6:20 am
Daugherty—the Court has said that a congressional subpoena is valid so long as there is a conceivable legislative purpose. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 4:15 am
” United States v. [read post]
