Search for: "Shoe v. Administrator, Va*"
Results 241 - 260
of 285
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2006, 11:22 am
" The statute also provides that "a civil action for a violation of this section may be brought only if the conduct involves 1 of the factors set forth in clause (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) of subsection (a)(5)(B). [read post]
14 Jan 2010, 10:51 am
BMP-2 and BMP-7 have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for human clinical uses. [read post]
10 Jan 2021, 11:53 am
” Gray v. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 1:07 pm
FTC v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 4:38 pm
HHJ Birss QC took the opportunity of the question session to explain that in certain cases, where the parties agree, he may be prepared to give preliminary views on the case during a Case Management Conference and/or deal with cases on paper (as was done in Hoffmann v DARE). [read post]
11 Feb 2021, 2:53 pm
” The District Court in Viamedia, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 12:54 am
Judge Birss took the opportunity of the question session to explain that in certain cases, where the parties agree, he may be prepared to give preliminary views on the case during a Case Management Conference and/or deal with cases on paper (as was done in Hoffmann v DARE). [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 12:28 am
Guthrie and Cravath The era of the white-shoe lawyer arguably began on May 1, 1899, when Paul Cravath, then a 37-year-old corporate lawyer lateraled into the Seward law firm, thus becoming the law partner of 40-year-old William Guthrie in the firm that would eventually evolve into Cravath Swaine & Moore. [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 6:35 pm
After all, Missouri v. [read post]
23 May 2014, 11:37 am
Second, the Gerardi case confounded the reputations of two successive presidential administrations. [read post]
12 Mar 2022, 4:23 pm
From Hiers v. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 5:00 am
State v. [read post]
8 Mar 2020, 9:01 pm
Although only briefly in private practice, Weinstein did serve as a member of the legendary team of attorneys who worked on the appeal to the Supreme Court of Brown v. [read post]
2 Apr 2010, 9:58 pm
Under the recently disclosed national position of the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) in letters from regional offices to Medicaid administrators in Idaho and Massachusetts, the spouse remaining in the couple’s home is permitted to take any action with respect to the home and other assets beginning in the month following the institutionalized spouse’s eligibility for Medicaid. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 1:23 pm
State v. [read post]
26 Jan 2024, 7:57 am
Supreme Court’s 1962 decision in Brown Shoe Co. v. [read post]
11 Jan 2022, 2:41 am
Resources Data Harvesting and Profiling: Ricci v. [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 3:00 am
Mandelbaum Orthotic & Prosthetic Services, Inc. v. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:01 pm
On April 22, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) initiated administrative and federal district court proceedings to block Tapestry, Inc. [read post]
14 Jul 2018, 6:42 am
Gibson v. [read post]
