Search for: "United States v. United States Shoe Corp" Results 61 - 80 of 149
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jun 2016, 5:02 am by David Markus
And when the sole opinion of the day was read from the bench, in a rollicking appeal about when an agency action is reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 6:00 am by David Kris
Wiretap Act (also known as Title III) prohibits the interception of a live communication (e.g., a telephone call) only if the interception occurs in the United States; it does not prohibit or regulate wiretaps (interception) conducted abroad.[8]  Similarly, the U.S. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 11:30 am
  The other shoe dropped this month in Corber’s companion case Romo v. [read post]
5 May 2015, 3:26 pm by Brian E. Barreira
What the Cohen holding means is that, for trust interpretation purposes, the MassHealth program stands in the same shoes as a creditor of the settlor. [read post]
5 May 2015, 3:26 pm by Brian E. Barreira
What the Cohen holding means is that, for trust interpretation purposes, the MassHealth program stands in the same shoes as a creditor of the settlor. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 9:12 am
”Id. at 1141-42 (various citations omitted).Courts in other states following this general approach are:  Haygood v. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 1:05 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
They also expressed concerns that Texas already had the broadest pre-suit discovery mechanisms in the entire country, and referred to the United States Supreme Court’s comment in Chick Kam Choo v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 10:15 pm
   Procedural History"DataTern appeals from the [United States District Court for the Southern District of New York]. [read post]