Search for: "United States v. Pierce" Results 181 - 200 of 658
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
In AMG, the Court rejected the FTC’s interpretation of Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, which states that the commission “may bring suit in a district court of the United States to enjoin” violations of the law that the FTC enforces. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 10:14 am by Beth Graham
After the Federal Circuit issued its opinion, Dow filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 10:03 am
The Court has already held that states have positive obligations to protect children from sexual abuse and corporal punishment from their parents (Z v United Kingdom (2002) and A v United Kingdom (1998), for example) and so the integrity of this public/private dividing line is not in issue, but whether it will be pierced from a gender perspective remains to be seen. [read post]
12 May 2015, 2:47 pm by John C. Manoog III
The Appellate Court’s Decision The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the suit. [read post]
4 Jul 2016, 5:00 am by Howard Friedman
United States, 41 Journal of Supreme Court History 21-38 (2016).Symposium on LGBT Antidiscrimination Law and Policy After Hobby Lobby. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 10:50 am by Julian Ku
  Imagine a court in the United States attempting to apply norms of U.S. law to pierce the corporate veil of a business incorporated under the law of a foreign country. [read post]
13 Sep 2024, 5:23 am by Jon May
What is critical is that Judge Cannon crossed way over the line when she refused to follow the decision of the United States Supreme Court in United States v. [read post]
22 Jan 2020, 2:42 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
Clinton was the 2016 Democratic Party nominee for President of the United States, United States Secretary of State from 2009 until 2013, a United States Senator for the State of New York from 2001 to 2009, and the First Lady of the United States from 1993 to 2001. [read post]
27 Sep 2010, 1:38 pm by Steve Bainbridge
  Also, because this is a case of first impression in the United States under this type of wording of the statute, it may be precedential to other jurisdictions with similar wording. [read post]