Search for: "United States v. Pollack" Results 1 - 20 of 70
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Aug 2009, 9:50 am
The case involves a gun range that the United States government operates on the shores of Lake Michigan. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 6:49 pm by Jacob Katz Cogan
Pollack, The Road Not Taken: Comparative International Judicial Dissent International DecisionsGeir Ulfstein, Qatar v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 2:51 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In July 2007, plaintiff appealed the Order of Dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit by notice filed by Pollack. [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 7:58 am by McNabb Associates, P.C.
Attorney’s Office Southern District of Florida on July 14, 2011 released the following: “INTERNATIONAL DRUG MONEY LAUNDERING INDICTMENT UNSEALED Wifredo Ferrer, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida and John V. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 9:11 pm
Supreme Court of Justice – Labor Chamber, Embassy of the Lebanese Republic in Colombia and Embassy of the United States of America in Colombia Eloïse Glucksmann, Commisimpex v. [read post]
23 Mar 2022, 2:04 pm by NARF
Pollack (Cultural Resources; National Historic Preservation Act; Tribal Consultation) State Courts Bulletin https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2022.html J.P. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 6:11 am by Marissa Miller
United States, in which the Justices will consider whether the Federal Tort Claims Act allows a prison inmate to sue the government for an alleged sexual assault committed by guards at a federal prison. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 10:35 am by Tara Hofbauer
The Supreme Court reached a decision today in Riley v. [read post]
27 Aug 2007, 3:00 am
Submitted by: Theodore Pollack, Senior Law Librarian, New York County Public Access Law Library. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:55 am by Patricia Salkin
The Complaint asserts six causes of action: (1) a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution based on Defendants’ actions in denying Plaintiffs their rights to freely practice their religion; (2) a violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”), 42 U.S.C. [read post]