Search for: "Washington v. Scott"
Results 281 - 300
of 1,341
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2019, 6:22 am
Most folks on Medicare have either a supplement or a Medicare Advantage plan, both of which are supposed to mitigate the likelihood of just this result.So I reached out to both co-blogger Bob V and FoIB Scott M, both of whom are active in the over-65 market, for their thoughts.Bob offered this take:"Hard to sayOriginal Medicare + supplement = minimal OOP except Rx. [read post]
9 Aug 2019, 3:00 am
Philadelphia Inquirer – Michael Brice-Saddler (Washington Post) | Published: 8/6/2019 The 44 names that U.S. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 4:02 am
At The Daily Signal, David Breemer explains why the Supreme Court was right to overrule precedent in Knick v. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 2:00 am
Destiny Washington focuses her practice at FordHarrison’s Atlanta office on the representation of employers in labor and employment law matters. [read post]
26 Jul 2019, 3:47 am
At his eponymous blog, Sheldon Nahmod maintains that Knick v. [read post]
21 Jul 2019, 4:03 pm
That’s according to a Washington Post report that Google has reached a settlement with the agency. [read post]
17 Jul 2019, 9:01 am
(As indeed was soon confirmed - see U.S. v. [read post]
17 Jul 2019, 4:04 am
At The Atlantic, Sarah Seo argues that Mitchell v. [read post]
13 Jul 2019, 2:50 pm
Harper v. [read post]
11 Jul 2019, 8:00 am
Supreme Court’s decision in South Dakota v. [read post]
6 Jul 2019, 4:03 pm
This post originally appeared on the Himsworth Scott website and is reproduced with permission and thanks [read post]
6 Jul 2019, 6:11 am
Scott Anderson parsed the State Department’s letter on the use of force against Iran. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 4:17 am
” In an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, Adam Carrington weighs in on Kisor v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 6:17 pm
Those claims must generally be brought in the Court of Federal Claims in Washington D.C. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 3:58 am
At The National Law Journal (registration may be required), Tony Mauro tells how a Washington attorney landed his first Supreme Court argument by volunteering to represent a pro se petitioner; the court will hear Banister v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 3:01 am
[Scott Shackford, Reason] By 6-3 margin, with three Justices concurring in part and dissenting in part, Supreme Court rules that First Amendment bars rule against registration of “scandalous” trademarks; Cato had submitted a humorous brief [Melissa Quinn, Washington Examiner, Ilya Shapiro, earlier; Iancu v. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 3:58 am
In Iancu v. [read post]
22 Jun 2019, 9:20 am
Circuit in Qasim v. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 12:46 pm
Township of Scott. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 6:42 am
Grunert, Scott C. [read post]
