Search for: "United States v. Tam"
Results 1 - 20
of 918
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 May 2023, 9:02 am
I was going to do a post collecting all the briefs filed in the United States Supreme Court in Lee v. [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 2:48 pm
By Kiran Jassal The Supreme Court of the United States recently heard oral arguments for Lee v. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 9:00 am
Tam (Matal v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 10:16 am
The court's decision in Miracle on 34th Street: Uh, since the United States government declares this man to be Santa Claus, this court will not dispute it. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 10:16 am
The court's decision in Miracle on 34th Street: Uh, since the United States government declares this man to be Santa Claus, this court will not dispute it. [read post]
20 Feb 2024, 10:01 am
Tam tomorrow, January 18, 2016. [read post]
30 Oct 2024, 10:27 am
District Court for the Middle District of Florida ruled in United States ex rel. [read post]
14 Jan 2025, 1:09 pm
United States ex rel. [read post]
22 Oct 2024, 12:18 pm
The decision, which came out on September 30, 2024, in United States ex rel. [read post]
11 Aug 2023, 11:21 am
Court of Appeals decision applying the Supreme Court’s decision in United States ex rel. [read post]
1 Oct 2024, 10:00 pm
Florida Medical Associates, LLC that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) create self-appointed “officers” of the United States in violation of the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, taking up questions raised by last year’s US Supreme Court dissent in United States ex rel. [read post]
1 Oct 2024, 10:00 pm
Florida Medical Associates, LLC that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) create self-appointed “officers” of the United States in violation of the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, taking up questions raised by last year’s US Supreme Court dissent in United States ex rel. [read post]
1 Oct 2024, 10:00 pm
Florida Medical Associates, LLC that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) create self-appointed “officers” of the United States in violation of the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, taking up questions raised by last year’s US Supreme Court dissent in United States ex rel. [read post]
1 Oct 2024, 10:00 pm
Florida Medical Associates, LLC that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) create self-appointed “officers” of the United States in violation of the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, taking up questions raised by last year’s US Supreme Court dissent in United States ex rel. [read post]
1 Oct 2024, 10:00 pm
Florida Medical Associates, LLC that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) create self-appointed “officers” of the United States in violation of the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, taking up questions raised by last year’s US Supreme Court dissent in United States ex rel. [read post]
1 Oct 2024, 10:00 pm
Florida Medical Associates, LLC that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) create self-appointed “officers” of the United States in violation of the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, taking up questions raised by last year’s US Supreme Court dissent in United States ex rel. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 9:11 am
"[Plaintiff] argues it should not have to pay any costs because it was acting in the public interest by bringing the lawsuit as a qui tam relator to help the United States enforce the false marking statute; and if anything, it should only be required to pay half of any allowable costs. [read post]
18 May 2010, 11:29 pm
On May 10, District Judge James Fox of the EDNC granted a homeowners association’s motion to remand to state court its case against a property owner, overruling the man’s objection that as a qui tam relator in a separate case, he was an officer of the United States for purpose of federal court jurisdiction. [read post]
10 Sep 2007, 3:10 pm
The False Claims Act allows an individual (called a “relator”) to bring a civil action (a qui tam action) “for the person and for the United States Government” against persons who have defrauded the government. [read post]
4 May 2010, 7:04 pm
In the now-famous/infamous case Pequignot v. [read post]
