Documents
Briefs, oral arguments, agency decisions and the Federal Register.
10,000+ results
0.55s
Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Oct 9, 2025
Callais, Nos. 24-109, 24-110 (U.S. Sept. 23, 2025) .............................................. 21 C. … Callais, Nos. 24-109, 24-110 (U.S. Sept. 23, 2025). But there is no doubt that racial segregation for districting purposes is still racial segregation.
Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Oct 9, 2025
Callais, Nos. 24-109, 24-110 (U.S. Sept. 23, 2025) .............................................. 21 C. … Callais, Nos. 24-109, 24-110 (U.S. Sept. 23, 2025). But there is no doubt that racial segregation for districting purposes is still racial segregation.
Petition — Ochs v. United States
Supreme Court brief · Petition · 1979
Maroney, supra, 399 U.S. at 52 n.10, 90 S.Ct. 1975. … Kern, 67 Misc.24 495, 324 N.Y.S. 24 442 (1971) contains a factual Similarity with what confronts us here.
444 U.S. 955Petition for Rehearing — Railroad Comm'n of Cal. v. Los Angeles R. Corp.
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Rehearing · 1929
Railroad Commission brief, pp. 20 to 33; City brief, pp. 24 to 38. … Columbus, 249 U. 8. 399; Opelika v. Opelika Sewer Co., 265 U. S. 215; Public Service Co. v. St. Cloud, supra, and Southern Utilities Co. v. Palatka, 268 U. S. 232.
280 U.S. 145Amicus Curiae Brief — Whorton v. Bockting
Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2007
Murphy, 96 F.3d 856 (CA7 1996) (en banc), rev'd on other grounds, 521 U.S. 320 (1997) ....... 24 Linkletter v. Walker, rr rr erry ree ) Mackey v. … Marathon Pipe Line Co., Fe es PCRS racine busccadesesunseusess 24 Nix v. Williams, ey Gt Se ED. hoe Gacuréaddurenenseusaeues 25 Ohio v. Roberts, RR OTe er eT re ere 5 O'Dell v.
549 U.S. 406Petition for A Writ of Certiorari — Erreca v. United States
Supreme Court brief · Petition for A Writ of Certiorari · 1948
Dec. 399........ Fatherree et al. v. McCormick et al., 199 Miss. 248, 24 rE fas RS oe a hk SoM ks wv wean 8 & ielsenthal v. Warring, 40 Cal. App. 119, 180 Pac. 67. Poster v. … Dec. 399. ‘*A reservation or exception can only be out of the estate granted.”’ Hill v.
335 U.S. 884Petition for a Writ of Certiorari — Buteau v. Connecticut
Supreme Court brief · Petition for a Writ of Certiorari · 1950
Chin Lung, 106 Conn, 701. 4, 24 30 State vs. Coffee, 56 Conn. 399 il INDEX PAGE Turner vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 338 U.S. 62, 69 S. Ct. 1352 19, 23, 26, 31, 32 United States vs. … Statutes, Rev. 1930, Sec. 239; (Sec. 54-h, C.S. 1945; Sec. 465, G.S. 1949) 30 1945 Supplement to the General Statutes: Section 54-h, C.S. 1945 (Sec. 465, G.S. 1949) 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 21, 22, 24
339 U.S. 903Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Egan v. Wells Fargo Alarm Services
Supreme Court brief · Petition for Writ of Certiorari · 1994
Williams, 234 Neb. 890, 453 N.W.2d 399 (1990). … Williams, 234 Neb. 890, 453 N.W.2d 399 (1990).
513 U.S. 929Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Sep 23, 2024
Supp. 3d at 399–400. … Id. at 399.
Respondents Brief — Jose Trevino, et al., Petitioners v. Susan Soto Palmer, et al.
Supreme Court brief · Respondents Brief · Dec 29, 2023
Perry, 548 U.S. 399 (2006) .............................................. 23 Lujan v. … See Exs. 399-401.
Brief for the Respondent in Opposition — Calderon v. Atlas SS Co.
Supreme Court brief · Brief for the Respondent in Opposition · 1898
Rep., 399. Aff'g S. C., 27 lbid, 476. The Denmark, 27 bid, 141. Green vs. Boston & Lowell R. R., 128 Mass., 221. … S., 24, 27. There is no distinction on principle between these cases and the one at bar.
170 U.S. 272Supplemental Brief — FCC v. Beach Communications, Inc.
Supreme Court brief · Supplemental Brief · 1993
FCC, 399 F.2d 65 (8th Cir. 1968), and subse- quently found its way into the Cable Act. … Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 371-5700 November 24, 1992 Counsel for Respondents.
508 U.S. 307Amicus Curiae Brief — Azar v. Garza, 138 S. Ct. 1790 (2018) (No. 17-654)
Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2018
(Pet. 20-24, relying on United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 39 (1950), and similar authorities). … Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399, 409-410 (1986)).
Opposition Brief — Nebrasks v. Parker, 136 S. Ct. 27 (2015) (No. 14-1406)
Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 2015
App. 24. 3 22 Stat. 341. … Utah, 510 U.S. 399, 420 (1994)).
Opposition — Patrick Simpson v. State of Georgia
Supreme Court brief · Opposition · 1981
Illinois, 399 U.S. 235 (1970). Petitioner is not being held beyond the statutory maximum penalty; rather, his basic claim must be that he has a right to probation. … Illinois, 399 U.S. 235, 245, n. 21 (1970), which cited with approval statutes in California, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
450 U.S. 972Reply Brief — Delaware v. Van Arsdall
Supreme Court brief · Reply Brief · 1986
Green, 399 U.S. 149 (1970) 0D Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967) 00. 3, 8,9 Connecticut v. Johnson, 460 U.S. 73 (1983) 2000. 9 Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (1974) 2 5, 9.11 Delaware v. … California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 (1967), dictates reversal only where there is a reasonable possibility, not just any possibility, that the error affected the judgment.
475 U.S. 673Opposition — Darneille v. Caro
Supreme Court brief · Opposition · 1980
Computing Scale Co., 261 U.S. 399, BB. (A923) cccccccvcccs os eee od coer a3 United Airlines, Inc. v. … Computing Scale Co., 261 U.S. 399, 418 (1923); Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co. Vv. wolf Brothers, 240 U.S. 251, 257-258 (1916).
449 U.S. 825Opposition Brief — Pickette v. United States
Supreme Court brief · Opposition Brief · 1976
Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, $1-52.° 3. … California, 386 U.S. 18. 21-24.
425 U.S. 935Petition for a Writ of Certiorari — Segura v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
Supreme Court brief · Petition for a Writ of Certiorari · 1975
Immigration and Naturalization Serviee, 399 ee ee IE vicina nanncuweee's* sou.cuwebwhs 8,9 Immigration and Naturalization Service vy. Errico, 385 U.S. … Immigration and Naturalization Service, 399 F.2d 98 (6th Cir. 1968), reliance on that case would seem to be mis- placed.
420 U.S. 946Respondents Brief — Henry P. Alfano and William Hird, Petitioners v. United States
Supreme Court brief · Respondents Brief · Jul 19, 2019
Broad St., Ste. 810 Philadelphia, PA 19109 (215) 399-9592 lam@mathewson-law.com Attorney for Respondent Tynes MEREDITH A. … Appx. 26–27 n.24 (accepting that Tynes joined the motion).
Ask Donna what matters in the record.
She can read the source against your case and show you exactly where the answer came from.