Search for: "Place Properties, L.P."
Results 181 - 200
of 211
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Sep 2014, 10:30 am
§ 1396a(a)(30)(A) where they do not bear a reasonable relationship to provider costs and remain in place for budgetary reasons. [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 10:11 am
The walls of deference are high and hard to climb, and the place death, considering who thou art, respondent. [read post]
21 May 2011, 10:45 pm
Motel 6 Operating L.P., 534 F.3d 672, 681-82 (7th Cir. 2008). [read post]
30 Sep 2009, 10:11 am
See San Saba Energy, L.P. v. [read post]
12 Nov 2010, 7:06 pm
MLB Advanced Media, L.P., 517 F.3d 1284, 1290 (Fed. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 3:00 pm
Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 1:09 pm
The PTO’s asserted justification for this total ban on registration is “to protect the intellectual property right of privacy and publicity that a living person has in his/her identity. [read post]
7 May 2018, 10:25 pm
Report and Recommendation issued almost a year after oral argument on cross-motions for summary judgment, concludes that Odyssey Education Resources LLC was properly appointed as a Servicer, and should be paid its invoices. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 12:19 pm
The more favorable statutes require a loss of money or property. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 10:00 pm
You should have waited before putting the product on the market in the first place! [read post]
9 Jan 2020, 12:03 pm
City applied in-fill exemption to 7 unit development project on steep sloped property designated for medium high density of 30-44 units; city determined based on steep slope constraints project was consistent with general plan and zoning Court applied deferential standard to general plan consistency determination, found that city balanced density designation with steep slope issues, project consistent On the same basis, the project complied with the requirement of the in-fill categorical… [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 11:34 am
Manalapan Realty, L.P. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 10:25 am
Interestingly, lower courts have declined to adopt either of these more general standards as well, and instead have largely preferred to use standards that are unique to the intellectual property context. [read post]
26 Oct 2015, 3:24 pm
City of Monterey Park (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 394 [voter-approved ballot measure was funding mechanism or fiscal activity, not commitment to specific project with potential environmental impacts]; Cedar Fair, L.P. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2018, 4:14 pm
County of Fresno (Friant Ranch, L.P.) (2018) ___ Cal.5th ___, Case No. [read post]
5 Nov 2015, 6:13 am
Green of Beachwood, L.P., 2015-Ohio-1193 (The purpose of punitive damages is not to compensate a plaintiff, but to punish and deter certain conduct, quoting Moskovitz v. [read post]
21 Feb 2020, 10:37 am
Texas Supreme Court continues to exempt an entire industry (the legal profession) from civil liability; lets attorneys and law firms profit from lawsuits brought to hold them accountable for wrongdoing. [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 9:57 am
H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P., No. 20-915, slip op. at 2. [read post]
2 Oct 2016, 12:11 pm
Section 101 creates a “patent-free zone” and places within it the indispensable instruments of social, economic, and scientific endeavor. [read post]
4 Nov 2021, 5:37 am
The assurance of fairness preserved by public presence at a trial is not lost when one party's cause is pursued under a fictitious name.[8] Nonetheless, even courts that take this view acknowledge that "there remains a clear and strong First Amendment interest in ensuring that '[w]hat transpires in the courtroom is public property.'"[9] And other courts put it even more strongly: [L]awsuits are public events and the public has a legitimate interest in knowing the… [read post]
