LandRightsNFarming: SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC.,(et al) v.,CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, et al.,

December 26, 2010

The following is a portion of the attached pdf; 08-1521-tsac-the-heartland-institute

No. 08-1521
================================================================

In The
Supreme Court of the United States
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
OTIS MCDONALD, ADAM ORLOV,
COLLEEN LAWSON, DAVID LAWSON,
SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC.,
AND ILLINOIS STATE RIFLE ASSOCIATION,
Petitioners,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, et al.,
Respondents.

--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------

On Writ Of Certiorari To The
United States Court Of Appeals
For The Seventh Circuit

--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------

BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF THE HEARTLAND
INSTITUTE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
MAUREEN MARTIN
W3643 Judy Lane
Green Lake, Wisconsin 54941
(920) 295-6032

Counsel for the Amicus Curiae
The Heartland Institute

NANCY LEE CARLSON*
726 Braeburn Road
Inverness, Illinois 60067
(847) 962-1775

*Counsel of Record

COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO. (800) 225-6964
OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831
================================================================

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................... ii
INTEREST OF THE AMICUS CURIAE ............... 1
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................ 2
ARGUMENT ........................................................... 3
I. Introduction ................................................. 3
II. Chicago’s Handgun Ban Is an Utter Failure
................................................................. 5
A. Handgun Murders Have Soared During
the 25 Years the Ordinance Has
Been in Effect ........................................ 6
B. Handgun Murders by Youths Are Soaring
.......................................................... 7
III. The Police Have No Legal or Constitutional
Duty to Protect Citizens from Crime .......... 10
IV. The Police Have No Practical Ability to Protect
All Citizens from Every Crime ............. 12
CONCLUSION ....................................................... 14
APPENDIX .......................................................... App. 1

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
CASES
Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982) .......... 11
DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of
Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) ...................... 11
DeSmet v. The County of Rock Island, 219
Ill. 2d 497, 848 N.E.2d 1030 (2006) ........................ 10
Schaffrath v. Village of Buffalo Grove, 160
Ill. App. 3d 999, 513 N.E.2d 1026 (1st Dist.
1987) .................................................................. 10, 11
CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT PUBLICATIONS
Chicago Police Department, 1996 Annual Report
.................................................................... App. 2
Chicago Police Department, 1997 Annual Report
.................................................................... App. 2
Chicago Police Department, 1998 Annual Report
........................................................................... 12
Chicago Police Department, 2008 Annual Report
........................................................................... 12
Detective Division (Chicago Police Department)
1992 Murder Analysis .................................... 8
Detective Division (Chicago Police Department)
1999 Murder Analysis ........................... App. 2
Research and Analysis Division, Research and
Development Section (Chicago Police Department)
2003 Murder Analysis ........................... App. 2

iii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Research and Analysis Division, Research and
Development Section (Chicago Police Department)
2004 Murder Analysis ........................... App. 2
Research and Analysis Division, Research and
Development Section (Chicago Police Department)
2005 Murder Analysis ........................ App. 2-3
Chicago Police Department, 2006-07 Murder
Analysis in Chicago ......................................... App. 3
Chicago Police Department, 2008 Murder
Analysis in Chicago .................................................. 8
OTHER PUBLICATIONS
Stephanie Banchero and Azam Ahmed, Chicago
Public Schools announce plan to combat
violence, Schools chief Ron Huberman identifies
students most at risk, CHICAGO TRIBUNE,
September 4, 2009 ..................................................... 8
Campbell Gibson, Population of the 100 Largest
Cities and Other Urban Places in the
United States: 1790 to 1990, Population Division
Working Paper No. 27, Population Division,
U.S. Bureau of the Census, June 1998 ..... App. 3
NELSON LUND, J.D., PH.D., A PRIMER ON THE
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR
ARMS, Virginia Institute for Public Policy
(2002) ................................................................. 13, 14
Maureen Martin, Handgun Ban Plaintiff Urges
Gun Rights in Crime-Ridden Neighborhoods,
The Heartland Institute (November 9, 2009) .......... 3

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES – Continued
Page
Daniel D. Polsby & Dennis Brennen, Taking
Aim at Gun Control, The Heartland Institute
(1995) ................................................................... 2, 12
U.S. Census Bureau Fact Sheet, Chicago, Illinois,
2000 .....................................................................
United States Department of Justice, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information
Services Division, 2008 Crime in
the United States ....................................................... 6
The University of Chicago Crime Lab, Gun Violence
Among School-Age Youth in Chicago
(2009) ......................................................................... 9
The University of Chicago Crime Lab, Chicago
Youth Gun Violence Initiative (2009) ...................... 10

The following is taken from pages 7-10 af the incorporated in entirety by refernce pdf ;

".........SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
In this case, Otis McDonald and the other
Petitioners seek the right to possess handguns within
their homes for the purpose of self-defense. They need
handguns.
In the 25 full years since Chicago passed its
handgun ban, handgun murder rates have soared, as
have murders by young people in the city. Chicago
schools have launched a $30 million social program to
3
deter violence by public school students, but this
program has literally just begun. In the meantime,
Petitioners have no right to possess handguns to
defend themselves, and police have no legal or
constitutional duty to rescue citizens from violence.
The Chicago handgun ban has been completely
ineffective in reducing handgun murders. Therefore,
it does not advance the public interest, and it ought to
be found unconstitutional by this Court.
--------------------------------- ♦ ---------------------------------
ARGUMENT
I. Introduction
Otis McDonald, 76, became the lead plaintiff in
this case because he “resides in a high-crime neighborhood”
and “has been threatened by drug dealers.”
(Complaint, ¶¶1, 11.) As a result, he presently
intends to possess a handgun “within his home for
self-defense” but cannot do so because of the Chicago
handgun ban ordinance. Id. at ¶11.
In a recent interview, McDonald explained the
reasons why he believes he needs a gun for selfdefense
within his home:2
2 Maureen Martin, Handgun Ban Plaintiff Urges Gun Rights in
Crime-Ridden Neighborhoods, The Heartland Institute (November 9,
2009) available at http://www.heartland.org/article/26330/Handgun_
Ban_Plaintiff_Urges_Gun_Rights_in_CrimeRidden_Neighborhoods.
html.
4
Where I live [on Chicago’s South Side], I’m
always concerned about the neighborhood.
I’ve lived here 30 some years, and I like it
here, and I wanted to keep it clean, keep it
protected, and keep the property value up.
I’m concerned heavily about the kids, about
the real young kids coming up in this
environment, because they are being trained
to be what the older ones are. They’re recruited
daily, nightly, to be drug dealers and
gangbangers.
They’re only seeing the dark side. They’re
brought up in the dark side, and they’re
seeing so many kids with big cars and plenty
of money. This is the only life, in their eyes.
That’s what they’re learning. They have no
respect for themselves. Therefore, you know
they have no respect for police officers and
certainly not the elderly people in the
neighborhood.
Residents in his neighborhood are “afraid,” he
said, “and they have reasons to be afraid. Being out
there and being confronted a few times, I know these
kids; they’re dangerous. They don’t care about living,
they have no respect for their elders, police officers.”
That is why McDonald agreed to get involved in
the Chicago case.
[T]he police can’t do it alone. There are too
many guns in here and they’re coming in
here too fast. They [the police] need the
community to have the right to a handgun in
5
their own home. I believe to my heart that
will help the police out, [protecting people]
from home robbery, burglary.
I will not be pinned down in my house without
anything to defend myself, while they
walk the streets. I will not be victimized by
the law that tells me I cannot have a handgun
in my own home, when I know there’s a
right that’s out there that’s given to me. The
people out there on the streets don’t have the
right to have a gun out there on the streets.
But we law-abiding citizens – senior citizens,
I may stress – have the constitutional right
under the Second Amendment. It will make
the residents, old people like myself, feel a
little more secure.
Chicago Police Department crime statistics, set
out and discussed below, demonstrate that Mc-
Donald’s apprehensions, and those of his neighbors,
are well-founded...."

Additionally taken from page 14 is the following;

......"

14

CONCLUSION
The founder of modern criminology, Cesare
Beccaria, knew two centuries ago what Chicago is
only now finding out: that gun bans cause murders:
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a
thousand real advantages for one imaginary
or trifling inconvenience; that would take
fire from men because it burns, and water
because one may drown in it; that has no
remedy for evils, except destruction. The
laws that forbid the carrying of arms are
laws of such a nature. They disarm those
only who are neither inclined nor determined
to commit crimes. . . . Such laws make things
worse for the assaulted and better for the
assailants; they serve rather to encourage
than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed
man may be attacked with greater confidence
than an armed man.
Lund, supra at 14, quoting Cesare Beccaria, On
Crimes and Punishments 87-88 (Henry Paolucci
trans., 1963) (1764)."..........

In other words, gun bans only protect the criminals who are going to obtain the guns one way or another, use them against those unarmed, who the authorities say they have no obligation to protect.

Catch 22 veritable quandary. Won't, don't, can't, and/or refuse to come to the aid of individuals paying FCSME ( FEDERATION OF COUNTY STATE MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ) union dues paying members, paid by American's taxed dollars for services that ARE NOT PROVIDED?

This is simply explained as "BREACH OF CONTRACT" and "OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSE." and "THEFT BY DECEPTION" but not limited to, by any means.

BREACH OF CONTRACT.

FSCME are ALL paid by American's taxed dollars. All FSCME are either voted into office as PUBLIC SERVANTS, by the public, or appointed into office by other FSCME.

(FSCME; as a top donor to the political process, (a vested interest) see Trial Lawyers Inc Report 2003 on "The Litigation Industry".... as a Racketeering Enterprise".....)

Intentional willful failure to act is BREACH OF CONTRACT.

Also, acting outside the SCOPE OF AUTHORITY, ie, unlawful arrests, fines, tickets etc. is breach of contract., which negates, nullifies any FSCME claim to immunities, privileges, and or exemptions, which MUST, at all times, be reciprocated to All Americans, pursuant to the International Organizations Immunities Act of December 9, 1945.

OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES.

FSCME, at all levels, [allegedly] take an oath to uphold the Constitution. FSCME know for a fact that each/all are acting as Corporate entities as well published evidence supports. The Census Bureau additionally provides documented evidence of these "Industries" which supports the argument of "Corporations" for profit.

Argument in opposition of "for Profit" status entangles corporate theft by deception, embezzlement, and tax fraud, even further in that 501(c)(3) status also proves "Corporate" Staus regardless of "For Profit" or "Not for Profit".

FSCME are paid by American's to perform specific duties. Judges are to act in good behavior, they are to act within the judicial canons, they are not to have vested interest, and they are not to have bias.

Judges are ALL acting with a vested interest, as/with/for/under/ employees /agents of the American Bankers Association, WITH a vested INTEREST in the outcome of ALL court CASES.

This stated fact is proven by the evidence of Court Registry Investment System(C.R.I.S) in which all court cases, in which further additional evidence shows that US District Courts are obtaining all state court cases.

Documented evidence further provides that several US Federal District Judges are signing orders by/through/for themselves, with no case numbers assigned, no Plaintiffs, no defendants, but orders the courts to enter into the Court Registry Investment System, through the Dallas/Houston Texas Federal Reserve, who then allegedly takes 25.28% from all securities.

This is done so after the court clerks, members of FSCME, assigns a public debt number to ALL CASES, using the Public debt form 1522 et al, in order to obtain a CUSIP (C) number.

CUSIP, a copyrighted registered trademark of THE AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION, which stands for COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM SECURITIES IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES proves ;

1) Every Court Clerk is ;

a) A member of that committee by assigning CUSIP numbers

b) Committing copyright infringement with forethought and malice

c.) Has a vested interest

d) Obtaining Money Under False Pretense

2.) Every Judge is;

a.) Ruling with bias

b.) Is a member of CUSIP

c.) Has a vested interest

d.) Breached his/her Oath

e.) Obtaining Money Under False Pretense

There are so may examples to explain this fraud committed by court officers, each FSCME, the reader is advised to go to AIB Talkshoe Archives and listed to the talks giving detailed evidence of this, and other. fraud committed against America by these Corporate FSCME, CUSIP. ABA/ABA's (AMERICAN BANKER'S ASSOCIATION/AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION). Each knowingly, willingly, with intent, forethought and malice obtaining money under false pretense.

THEFT BY DECEPTION

FSCME are voted into office as public servants, meaning, they are ALL servants for the public.

All FSCME, this includes but not limited to;, Sheriff/Deputies, State Patrol, Judges, Court Clerks, Tax Assessors, County Auditors, County Commissioners, the Jails, Correctional Facilities, Governors, Attorney Generals, Presidents, and the like, all voted into office or appointed positions by those voted into office, but all traded on D&B, Fidelity, et al for profits, but not acting within the Highway Saftey Act in which each Municipality is to receive 40%, thereby dedeiving the public and having unlawfully obtained unjust enrichment, fraudulently conveyed into corporate status tax payers money and kept that which was to be shared or returned to the municipalities, per Highway Safety Act, but not limited to.

Additionally, having requested the business license from several government offices, but denied such, as; "We are Government Offices and don't need a license.."

Again, aside from other obvious violations, "we don't need a license" further proves THEFT BY DECEPTION and IRS violations to say the least, that if these FSCME entities are all listed on D&B, which evidence supports on /in/for the record they in fact are listed as such, incorporated in entirety by reference, and each/all investing through CRIS, by use/authority of Judges, Prosecuting Attorneys et al, each/all members of The American Bar Association, into the Houston/Dallas Texas Federal Reserve, a privately owned Bank, then the American Bankers Association, acting in concert, conspiracy and collusion is aiding and abetting as The Master Mind in this grand scale, well orchestrated, FSCME THEFT BY DECEPTION against Americans.

And [they]/FSCME and CUSIP, state it is not their responsibility to protect the American citizen, from whom each/all receive their paid salaries, and they FSCME/ABA/ABA/CUSIP et al want to pass gun laws so the American's cannot protect themselves from known/unknown criminals, who are intentionally acting outside the scope of authority, under color of law, with intent to cause bodily or other damage, injury and/or harm against an unwitting, unarmed victim/payor of FSCME salary, who is then, through the courts, using CRIS traded as Securities after assigned a Public Debt Number then a CUSIP number, and then traded internationally through identity theft, and espionage by alleged officers of the court that were voted into or elected into office, and who are in Breach of Contract and who are Obtaining Money Under False Pretense from John Q Public that is then traded for profit, which is then embezzled by FSCME/CUSIP into private accounts for profit, having committed Theft by Deception and none is returned into the municipality from whence it came?

See USC TITLE 18; 472;473;474;
All of the above statements of fact is upheld by documented evidence, many documents of which bears signatures by the perpetrator judges, authorizing CUSIP and CRIS investments, directly to the Federal Reserve.

All previously entered oral/written et al evidence entered into/on/for the/all record(s) by herein, whether remaining or unlawfully removed by any/all those mentioned above, is reasserted and realleged and incorporated in entirety by herein reference and introduction.

All God given rights reserved in perpetuity.

December 26, 2010

; Jeanette Audrey; [Triplett] PAG

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC) is seeking a ...

The Court Registry Investment System (CRIS) is a cash management system for court registry funds developed and tested by the Clerk, ...
www.dgmarket.com/tenders/np-notice.do~1202327 - Cached - Similar

http://www.dgmarket.com/tenders/np-notice.do~1202327

https://www.aigsettlementadministration.com/Documents/AIG%20Long%20Form%20Notice_Final.pdf
(AIG Long Form Notice Final.pdf) see attached

PDF]

STANDING ORDER ADOPTING COURT REGISTRY INVESTMENT - UNITED STATES ...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
Feb 1, 2010 ... Under Court Registry Investment System (C.R.I.S.) monies deposited ... courts in the Court Registry Investment System and used to purchase ...
www.mssb.uscourts.gov/laws/standing_orders/court_registry.pdf

http://www.mssb.uscourts.gov/laws/standing_orders/court_registry.pdf (ATTACHED)

court_registry ( see attached)

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/massachusetts/madce/1:2002cv10890/10575/674/

see attached ; Limone, et al v. United States of, et al.pdf

Limone, et al v. United States of, et al

Filing: 674

Judge Nancy Gertner: ORDER Regarding Payments of Additional Interest entered finding as moot 671 Motion by Limone and Tameleo Plaintiffs and Attorneys to Authorize Payments from Court Registry Investment System; granting 672 Amended Motion by Limone and Tameleo Plaintiffs and Attorneys to Authorize Payments from Court Registry Investment System. (Gaudet, Jennifer)

[PDF]

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council 1992-1994 Audit

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
Council's Joint Trust Fund with the United States District Court - Court Registry Investment System. (CRIS). CRIS is a cash management system developed by ...
www.evostc.state.ak.us/Universal/.../1992-1994%20audit.pdf - Similar

http://www.evostc.state.ak.us/Universal/Documents/Publications/Audits/1992-1994%20audit.pdf

1992-1994 audit.pdf see attached (exxon valdez oil spill trustte council 1992-1994 audit)

accounting-finance District-of-Columbia Financial Analyst

Oct 14, 2010 ... The incumbent of this position is responsible for all facets of the Judiciary Court Registry Investment System (CRIS) funds. ...
www.americajob.com/42033/accounting-finance/.../financial-analyst - Cached

http://www.americajob.com/42033/accounting-finance/District-of-Columbia/financial-analyst

Job Title:	Financial Analyst
Agency:	Judicial Branch
	Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
Salary:	74872.00 to 140321.00
Open Dates:	10/14/2010 to 10/29/2010
Pay Grade:	AD-0501/00
Location:	DC-Washington DC Metro Area (District of Columbia )
Openings:	1
This position is located in the Office of Finance and Budget (OFB), Investment Services Office (ISO). The ISO is responsible for investing registry funds in GAS securities under the Bureau of Public Debt’s Federal Investment Program. The incumbent of this position is responsible for all facets of the Judiciary Court Registry Investment System (CRIS) funds. Currently there are 27 Federal District Courts that participate in CRIS with a fund total of$3.5 billion. The Fund Manager is responsible for the record keeping, investment decisions and communications with the Federal Reserve Bank and the designated financial institution regarding investments. Duties of the position include, but are not limited to: • Preparing the financial statements in conformity with the accounting policies and procedures applicable to Judiciary Court Registry Investment Systems funds, which is a comprehensive basis of accounting; • Developing and implementing policy concerning CRIS internal Controls; • Making investment decisions that comport with the CRIS investment objective; • Directing the preparation of CRIS fund status reports; and gathering of investment inflows and outflows to participating courts; • Developing implementing and overseeing quality control programs to assure accuracy of the CRIS data base and its interfaces with the CRIS fund participants; • Serving as the liaison between the CRIS fund participants and the private sector brokerage and accounting service; and • Ensuring compliance with laws, regulations and contracts.

SEE ALSO ; www.mssb.uscourts.gov laws standing_orders court_registry.pdf

www.nhd.uscourts.gov/ru/local-rules/67.2.asp (FOLLOWING IN ENTIRETY)

US District Court Local Rules NH

Home < Rules < Local-rules < US District Court Local Rules NH

67.2 Deposit of Registry Funds Into Interest-Bearing Account

Receipt of Funds.
1. Unless an applicable statute requires the deposit of funds without leave of court, no funds governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 67 shall be tendered to the court or the clerk's office for deposit into the court's registry absent court order signed by a judge.
2. All funds received by the court or the clerk's office for any case pending or in the process of adjudication shall be deposited with the Treasurer of the United States, in the name and to the credit of this court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2041. Such deposits shall be made through depositories authorized to accept deposits on behalf of the Treasury Department of the United States.
3. The party making the deposit or transferring funds to the court's registry shall serve the order permitting the deposit or transfer on the clerk of court or, in the clerk's absence, upon the chief deputy clerk or financial administrator.
4. The procedures for the receipt and handling by the clerk of any funds deposited with the court shall not be waived except by order of the court. Any such order submitted for the court's consideration must reflect the clerk's signature.
Investment of Registry Funds. A motion and a proposed order setting forth the manner in which the funds will be deposited in an interest-bearing account or invested in an interest-bearing instrument must be submitted prior to the tender of such funds to the court.
1. Court Registry Investment System.
  1. Unless otherwise ordered, the Court Registry Investment System (CRIS), administered through the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, shall be the investment mechanism authorized.
  2. Under CRIS, monies deposited in each case under subsection (a)(1) will be "pooled" together with those on deposit with the Treasury to the credit of other courts in CRIS and used to purchase Treasury securities which will be held at the Federal Reserve Bank of the Dallas/Houston Branch in a safekeeping account in the name and to the credit of the Clerk, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, hereby designated custodian for the CRIS.
  3. A separate account for each case will be established in CRIS titled in the name of the case giving rise to the investment. All income received from each investment will be distributed on a pro-rata basis based upon the ratio of each account's principal to the total aggregate income received. Weekly reports indicating the amount of principal contributed and the income earned will be prepared and distributed to each court participating in CRIS and shall also be made available to the parties to the action or their counsel.
2. Other Investments and Instruments. Should an investment mechanism other than CRIS be utilized, the written stipulation filed by counsel must contain the following information:
  1. the amount to be invested;
  2. the form of interest-bearing account or instrument;
  3. the name and address of the federally insured local institution where the deposit is to be made or by whom the interest-bearing instrument is to be issued;
  4. the name, address, social security number or taxpayer identification number of the party or parties with a real or potential interest in the deposit or instrument;
  5. the form of additional collateral to be posted by the private institution in the event that standard FDIC or FSLIC coverage is insufficient to insure the total deposit;
  6. a direction to the clerk to deduct from the income earned on the investment a fee not exceeding that authorized by the Judicial Conference of the United States and set by the Director of the Administrative Office as published in the Federal Register; and
  7. such other appropriate information that may be deemed applicable under the facts and circumstances of the particular case.
  Upon court order to deposit and invest registry funds locally, the clerk shall serve as custodian of the account or financial instrument and shall keep such account, certificate of deposit, or financial instrument in a secure and safe place subject to further order of the court.
Registry Investment Fee. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1913 and this rule, the custodian is authorized and directed to deduct the registry fee. The proper registry fee shall be determined on the basis of the rates authorized by the Judicial Conference of the United States and set by the Director of the Administrative Office as published in the Federal Register. The authorized custodian of an investment account shall deposit such fee with the Treasury Department to the credit of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. In cases where funds are ultimately disbursed to the United States or to agencies or officials thereof, the clerk shall refund the registry fee to those agencies or officials upon application filed with the court.
Cash Bail. If cash bail in an amount in excess of $10,000 is deposited with the court, it may be placed in an interest-bearing account upon motion of the submitting party. The deposit shall comply in all respects with the requirements of this rule except that there shall be no administration fee assessed.

LandRightsNFarming

Sunday, December 26, 2010

SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, INC.,(et al) v.,CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, et al.,

USDC - District of New Hampshire - US District Court Local Rules

News Item > Federal Courts Safeguard Money: Court Registry ...

04-24-91 Deposits of Money into the Court Registry

Federal Courts Safeguard Money: Court Registry Investment System ...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ...

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC) is seeking a ...

FTC v. Verity, et al, - Stipulated Final Monetary Judgment on Remand

Warner Chilcott Limited Settled Or Otherwise Concluded Class ...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK United ...

SEC Obtains Summary Judgment Against Four Defendants in CMKM ...

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC) is seeking a ...

STANDING ORDER ADOPTING COURT REGISTRY INVESTMENT - UNITED STATES ...

Limone, et al v. United States of, et al

Filing: 674

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council 1992-1994 Audit

accounting-finance District-of-Columbia Financial Analyst

Blog Archive