Search for: "United States v. United States Dist. Ct." Results 41 - 60 of 980
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Mar 2023, 6:14 am by Chip Merlin
These may include data analytics, social media monitoring, and referral to special investigation units. [read post]
27 Feb 2023, 8:09 am by Russell Knight
” In re Marriage of Gambla and Woodson, 853 NE 2d 847 – Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2006 The United States’ Supreme Court has deemed that acknowledgment of race in custody disputes is constitutional. [read post]
26 Jan 2023, 12:15 am
  In which geographic area must the consensus exist (California, or the United States, or the world)? [read post]
11 Jan 2023, 3:03 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The trustees (the Trustees) alleged that Reem Plumbing and Reem Contracting were contractually obligated to contribute to certain union benefit funds (the Funds), as required by four collective bargaining agreements between the Association of Contracting Plumbers of the City of New York and Local Union No. 1 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada (id.). [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 10:01 am by jonathanturley
However, it is a modified comparative negligence state so they must show that they are 50 percent or less at fault. [read post]
22 Oct 2022, 8:16 am by Russell Knight
In [the] Nixon [case], the [United States] Supreme Court stated that ‘[e]very court has supervisory power over its own records and files, and access [may be] denied where court files might[ ] become a vehicle for improper purposes. [read post]
13 Oct 2022, 3:48 pm by Eugene Volokh
Ct. 1st Dist. 2019) (holding that a statute prohibiting visitors to public housing units from possessing firearms on the property did not violate the Second Amendment); Doe v. [read post]
17 Aug 2022, 12:51 pm by Eugene Volokh
No. 4J, 301 Or. 358 (1986), appeal dismissed for want of substantial federal question, 480 U.S. 942 (1987) (over the dissenting votes of Brennan, Marshall, & O'Connor, JJ.); United States v. [read post]