Search for: "DEP" Results 2041 - 2060 of 5,050
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Jan 2016, 7:21 am by Joy Waltemath
After considering different decisions, the appeals court observed that the district court relied on the plain language of Title VII and the “simple test” for identifying facial sex discrimination outlined in the Supreme Court’s City of Los Angeles, Dep’t of Water & Power v. [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 8:00 pm by John Ehrett
Dep’t of Health & Human Services 15-543Issue: (1) Whether the Affordable Care Act’s tax on going without health insurance is a “Bill[] for raising Revenue” to which the Origination Clause applies; and (2) whether the Senate's gut-and-replace procedure was a constitutionally valid “amend [ment]” pursuant to the Origination Clause. [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 3:38 pm by Eugene Volokh
Dep‘t of Children & Families, that the state may refuse to place foster children with parents who occasionally spank their own children. [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 9:00 am by Diana A. Silva
J-67-2015 (Dec. 29, 2015), involves a challenge by EQT, a natural gas fracking operator, to civil penalties levied by DEP for contamination caused by a leaking fracking water impoundment. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 7:00 am by Victor Rivera Jr.
., 128 A.D.3d 218 (1st Dep’t 2015), the defendant, an estate owner of a luxury penthouse apartment (the “Seller”), sought summary judgment dismissing the complaint seeking the return of the plaintiff’s (the “Buyer”) $2.75 million deposit. [read post]
21 Dec 2015, 7:00 am by Victor Rivera Jr.
Well-Come Holdings, LLC, 128 A.D.3d 601, 10 N.Y.S.3d 72 (1st Dep’t 2015), the First Department considered a lower court dismissal of a third-party complaint brought by the sponsor of a condominium development (the “Sponsor”) against, among others, the architect retained by the Sponsor to design the development and inspect the on-going construction (the “Architect”). [read post]
8 Dec 2015, 8:00 pm by John Ehrett
Dep’t of Health & Human Services 15-543 Issue: (1) Whether the Affordable Care Act’s tax on going without health insurance is a “Bill[] for raising Revenue” to which the Origination Clause applies; and (2) whether the Senate’s gut-and-replace procedure was a constitutionally valid “amend [ment]” pursuant to the Origination Clause. [read post]