Search for: "United Energy Corp. v. United States" Results 221 - 240 of 653
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 May 2022, 6:01 am by Shayan Karbassi
The talks first began in early 2021 between the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China and Iran. [read post]
27 Oct 2013, 9:01 pm
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio recently asked itself the same question (as the title to this article asks) in Wellington Resource Group LLC v. [read post]
27 Apr 2015, 8:59 am by WIMS
 Appeals Court Environmental Decisions <> Delta Construction Company v. [read post]
20 Jul 2018, 3:17 pm by John Almy and William W. Pugh
Recently, the court applied Doiron in the context of a contract to plug and abandon a series of offshore wells in Crescent Energy Services, L.L.C., v. [read post]
20 Jul 2018, 3:17 pm by John Almy and William W. Pugh
Recently, the court applied Doiron in the context of a contract to plug and abandon a series of offshore wells in Crescent Energy Services, L.L.C., v. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 4:31 pm
" Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc. v. [read post]
12 May 2014, 4:12 am by Ann Caresani
Further, the United States Supreme Court reminded us again in CIGNA Corp. v. [read post]
9 Jul 2011, 7:14 am
In 1927 the United States Supreme Court decided Robins Dry Dock and Repair Co. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 2:53 pm by Dr. Elliot J. Feldman
” In pursuit of these goals, China and the United States created a joint “Clean Energy Research Center” to develop energy efficiency in buildings. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 2:53 pm by Dr. Elliot J. Feldman
” In pursuit of these goals, China and the United States created a joint “Clean Energy Research Center” to develop energy efficiency in buildings. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 9:39 am by admin
Duke Energy Corp., 549 U.S. 561 (2007), and Mayo Found. for Med. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 12:27 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITCriminal PracticeApplication Note Clarified Scope of Guidelines Increase; Ex Post Facto Clause Not Implicated United States, appellee v. [read post]