Search for: "United States v. Wood" Results 141 - 160 of 1,346
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jul 2021, 4:00 am by Michael Woods and Gordon LaFortune
Reviewed by Michael Woods. __________________ [1] Enbridge Energy Ltd. v State of Michigan, 2020 USDCWDMSD, Case 1:20-cv-01141 ECF No. 1, PageID.1 Online: < https://www.eenews.net/assets/2020/11/25/document_ew_05.pdf> [2] Enbridge Energy LP, supra note 1 at 1. [3] U.S.C. 6 [read post]
25 Jun 2021, 1:16 pm by Josh Blackman
United States Dept. of Transp., 879 F. 3d 339, 344 (CADC 2018). [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
If I were to include a single additional case from a court, I would include one from a federal trial court rather than the Supreme Court: future Justice William Woods’s United States v. [read post]
14 May 2021, 7:10 am by Arturo Jara
Notable Cast: Ruth Negga, Joel Edgerton, and Will Dalton.Director: Jeff NicholsYear: 2016IMDB Rating: 7.0/10Memorable Quote: “You realize this case could alter the Constitution of the United States? [read post]
7 May 2021, 6:00 am by Terry Hart
“The legal issue, simply stated, is whether a work first published in a foreign country without proper copyright notice is subject to copyright protection in the United States. [read post]
17 Apr 2021, 9:30 am by Steve Gottlieb
One of my fellow students at law school was Drew Days, who became the first African-American head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division and later Solicitor General of the United States. [read post]
25 Mar 2021, 10:51 am by Legal Aggregate
He founded the law school’s Environment and Natural Resources program and served as a special master for the United States Supreme Court in Montana v. [read post]
11 Feb 2021, 2:35 pm by Josh Blackman
As President Trump notes, one of the articles of impeachment [Article 10] charged President Johnson with insulting and denouncing Congress by "mak[ing] and declar[ing] … certain intemperate, inflammatory, and scandalous harangues … [which] are peculiarly indecent and unbecoming in the Chief Magistrate of the United States. [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 11:56 am by Phil Dixon
(1) Despite the State’s repeated use of “moped” to describe the defendant’s vehicle, sufficient evidence existed to establish that the defendant’s vehicle met the statutory definition of “motor vehicle”; (2) New trial required where trial court plainly erred in failing to instruct the jury on the definition of “motor vehicle” State v. [read post]