United States v. DeJesus-Rosales

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the district court should apportion costs award when there are multiple defendants, unless it is \rendered impracticable by the interrelationship of the claims\
• holding that a party to a contract is “excused from performing under the contract” if the other party “fail[s] to perform within a reasonable time” 17 under the circumstances
• holding that the district court should apportion costs award when there are multiple defendants, unless it is \rendered impracticable by the interrelationship of SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 61 (0) 1947A the claims\
• holding that the district court should apportion costs award when there are multiple defendants, unless it is \rendered impracticable by the interrelationship of SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 61 (0) 1947. the claims\
• holding that the district court should apportion costs award when there are multiple SUPREME COURT defendants, unless it is \rendered impracticable by the interrelationship of OF NEVADA 101 1947A 60 ' the claims\
• holding that the district court should apportion costs award when there are multiple SUPREME COURT defendants, unless it is \rendered impracticable by the interrelationship of OF NEVADA 101 1947A 60 ' the claims\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).