Search for: "State v. Nielsen" Results 181 - 200 of 488
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Sep 2020, 11:32 am by Anne Joseph O'Connell
In a memorandum from Mitnick to Nielsen, Mitnick wrote: “Pursuant to your authority set forth in section 113 of title 6, United States Code, you have expressed your desire to designate certain officers of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in order of succession to serve as Acting Secretary. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 12:29 pm by Ronald F. Wick
After the Second Circuit first held the arbitration waiver invalid (“Amex I”), the Supreme Court remanded the case for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court decision in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 6:45 am
United States (08-1119), petitioner's reply Astrue v. [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 6:50 am by Amy Howe
At the Ogletree Deakins blog, Vicki Nielsen and Hera Arsen report on Tuesday’s oral argument in United States v. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 7:03 am by Howard Bashman
Justice Alito announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court in various respects in Nielsen v. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 3:27 am by Edith Roberts
” At the Immigration Prof Blog, Kevin Johnson maintains that Nielsen v. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 5:30 am by Renee Kolar
[v]  Second, other commentators reveal there is no support at all in the legislative history of the FAA for the idea that the Act was intended to prohibit state laws that preserve the right of claimants to arbitrate collectively. [read post]
15 Oct 2018, 3:53 am by Edith Roberts
At the ImmigrationProf Blog, Kevin Johnson looks at last week’s oral argument in Nielsen v. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 3:18 pm by rlargent@cdflaborlaw.com
  The court of appeal relied on the United States Supreme Court 's decision in Stolt-Nielsen v. [read post]
25 Mar 2013, 9:46 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Oxford Health asked a federal district court and the Third Circuit appellate court to overturn the arbitrator’s ruling, citing the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. [read post]