Search for: "Cost v. Commonwealth"
Results 261 - 280
of 670
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Dec 2016, 10:50 pm
Carroll v. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 6:05 am
’ Commonwealth v. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 6:05 am
’ Commonwealth v. [read post]
14 Dec 2016, 5:00 am
Sept. 9, Dowling, J.).Whether other trial court judges from around the commonwealth will rule in a similar fashion or will, instead, apply the same rule of discovery pertaining to video surveillance remains to be seen.Claims of Privileged Information in DiscoveryIn its decision in the case Brown v. [read post]
1 Dec 2016, 12:21 pm
State Police v. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 11:46 am
In order to offset the cost of the medical examination, the injured worker must submit a fee equal to her or his average weekly wage in the Commonwealth at the time of the appeal. [read post]
28 Nov 2016, 11:46 am
In order to offset the cost of the medical examination, the injured worker must submit a fee equal to her or his average weekly wage in the Commonwealth at the time of the appeal. [read post]
12 Nov 2016, 10:44 am
In Fecke v. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 5:21 am
You can read the opinion in this case, Battle v. [read post]
18 Sep 2016, 7:26 am
In Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. [read post]
17 Aug 2016, 12:12 pm
Facts of the Case In Commonwealth v. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 7:39 am
In Byfield v. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 7:39 am
In Byfield v. [read post]
26 Jul 2016, 12:22 pm
He has no on-going business in Virginia and has visited the Commonwealth only twice for reasons unrelated to this lawsuit. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 9:33 am
Case citation: Davison v. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 2:48 pm
John Reed Stark As I noted in a recent post, on June 8, 2016, the SEC, in what one commentator called “the most significant SEC cybersecurity-related action to date,” announced that Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC had agreed to pay a $1 million penalty to settle charges that as a result of its alleged failure to adopt written policies and procedures reasonably designed to protect customer data, some customer information was hacked and offered for sale online. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 5:57 am
The appellate panel also rejected arguments that amended Regulation A should be vacated as arbitrary and capricious because the SEC failed to explain adequately how the rule protects investors (Lindeen v. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 5:34 am
Padmanabhan v. [read post]
6 Jun 2016, 1:00 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: R (Bancoult No 2) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, heard 22 June 2015. [read post]
19 May 2016, 6:37 am
Because the Regulation merely limited the "use" of trade marks they did not strip away the trade mark owner;s right to prevent or exclude others from using their mark (citing Arnold J in Pinterest v Premium Interest). [read post]
