Search for: "ALLES v. INTERSTATE POWER CO."
Results 241 - 260
of 469
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Aug 2015, 9:35 am
Some cases, like D’Oench, Duhme & Co. v. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 11:28 am
Schechter Poultry Co. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
In my column today, I provide an update on one very important reform movement—the so-called National Popular Vote (“NPV”) interstate compact plan. [read post]
28 Jul 2015, 1:34 pm
This judgment resulted in a successful reorganization, and all of ASARCO’s creditors were paid in full. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 7:36 am
Co. [read post]
2 Jul 2015, 6:31 am
Co. v. [read post]
1 May 2015, 10:00 am
Electric Power Supply Association 14-841Issue: Whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's jurisdiction over interstate markets for wholesale sales of electric energy under sections 201, 205 and 206 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. [read post]
1 May 2015, 9:19 am
Electric Power Supply Association, 14-840, and EnerNOC, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 9:24 am
Jackson v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 12:29 pm
LEACH BUILDERS, LLC, ET AL., Petitioners, v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 12:29 pm
Leach Builders, LLC v. [read post]
27 Apr 2015, 9:01 pm
Hodges (Ohio), Tanco v. [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 6:28 am
Electric Power Supply Association 14-841Issue: Whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's jurisdiction over interstate markets for wholesale sales of electric energy under sections 201, 205 and 206 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 6:30 am
As the Supreme Court has recognized, the phrase `affecting interstate or foreign commerce’ is a term of art used by Congress to signal that it is exercising its full power under the Commerce Clause. [read post]
19 Mar 2015, 8:05 am
CPV Power Development, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 7:28 pm
& Trust Co. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2015, 7:19 am
Congress’s power to reach purely in-state conduct is premised on the possibility of interstate spillovers. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 8:41 am
Currin v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 10:24 am
Holmes Co. v. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 10:52 am
Ambler Realty Co.; and (2) whether a regulatory restriction on the right to use one's property “must substantially advance a legitimate state interest” to satisfy the substantive requirement of due process, per Lingle, Nectow, and Euclid. [read post]
