Eighth Circuit· 11/28/2000
United States v. Roy Neset
Citations
- 235 F.3d 415
- 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 29714
- 2000 WL 1742042
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding the “district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Neset's affirmative defenses attacking the validity of the microbroadcasting regulations”
- holding the “district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Neset's affirmative defenses attacking the validity of the microbroadcasting regulations”
- holding the “district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Neset's affirmative defenses attacking the validity of the microbroadcasting regulations”
- holding the “district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Neset's affirmative defenses attacking the validity of the microbroadcasting regulations”
- holding the “district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Neset's affirmative defenses attacking the validity of the microbroadcasting regulations”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McMillian, Heaney, Fagg
Read full opinion on CourtListenerOther cases named United States v. Roy Neset
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.