Search for: "United States v. Roman" Results 141 - 160 of 614
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2011, 4:00 am by Ted Folkman
And if the plaintiffs are ever able to commence proceedings to recognize and enforce the judgment in the United States, we will have an opportunity to consider the application of the Uniform Foreign Country Money Judgment Recognition Act or a similar state law. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 11:34 am by South Florida Lawyers
Roman estimated future medical care, if performed in Nicaragua, at approximately $5000 and $241,398.20, if provided in the United States. [read post]
23 Dec 2020, 12:16 pm by Stephen Wermiel
Among the religion cases, the most significant in impact has been Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 3:52 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“The plaintiff purchased a condominium unit from the defendants Roman Lyubarsky and Yelena Lyubarsky (hereinafter together the Lyubarskys). [read post]
20 Dec 2016, 1:48 pm by Rick St. Hilaire
"Assigned to this significant forfeiture case is Chief Judge Thomas Hogan, which is captioned of United States of America v. [read post]
9 May 2016, 5:42 am by ADeStefano
Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 21 NY3d at 154, quoting Consolidated Edison, 98 NY2d 208, 222 [2002]; see United States Fid. [read post]
28 Jul 2020, 10:25 am
Co.(2nd Dept., 7/22/2020)Before the Roman Catholic Mass was said in English in Mahwah, New Jersey, my brothers and sisters and I had to ask "May I be excused? [read post]
9 Jul 2017, 9:20 am by Brooke
Whitman's Hitler’s American Model: The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 1:17 pm by Robert Hambrick
 Van Gogh, Pot Pipe, 1887First, it's important to note that at least one recent case, Kentucky v. [read post]
28 Feb 2020, 6:55 am by John Elwood
In Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Juan, Puerto Rico v. [read post]
13 Jan 2008, 4:47 pm
Because statutes enacted under the Spending Clause of the United States Constitution must provide clear notice to the States of their liabilities should they decide to accept federal funding under those statutes, and because we conclude that NCLB fails to provide clear notice as to who bears the additional costs of compliance, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and REMAND this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 08a0007p.06 Blackburn… [read post]