Search for: "State v. Money" Results 3041 - 3060 of 20,456
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Sep 2007, 8:46 am
As Justice Brandeis noted, in his famous dissent in New State Ice Co. v. [read post]
19 Sep 2021, 9:37 am by Eric Goldman
The Florida Appellate Brief Some of the state’s concessions: the state conclusorily disagrees with the district court’s claim that the law applies to entities that don’t resemble social media, but didn’t push the issue. [read post]
25 Apr 2017, 3:39 am by Edith Roberts
First up is Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. [read post]
29 May 2009, 12:59 pm
The following is intended to provide a basic understanding of raising money through a private placement. [read post]
21 Mar 2015, 6:26 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
§ 42.8(b)(2), Petitioner states that the ’685 patent is the subject of several matters that may affect, or may be affected by a decision in this proceeding: Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 4:38 am by Amy Howe
California and United States v. [read post]
16 Sep 2014, 3:13 pm by Jason Rantanen
  As described by the court, this theorem states that “under the conditions stated in the premises, where two person bargain over a matter, there is a ‘solution’…in which ‘each bargainer get[s] the same money profit. [read post]
26 Oct 2023, 1:15 pm
California precedent currently allows California courts to enforce judgments of other tribunals (e.g., other states) even when those judgments enforce gambling debts. [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 5:48 pm
My latest Verdict column offers a thus-far-overlooked ground for the Supreme Court to rule for the federal government in Arizona v. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 5:10 am
In a case interpreting Arizona law, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Gaughan v. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 7:19 am by Andree Blumstein
Andrée Sophia Blumstein is the solicitor general of Tennessee, which joined an amicus brief with 19 other states in support of the challenger in Janus v. [read post]
12 Jan 2016, 6:59 am by Eric Goldman
Here, the Court found that Mason failed to state a claim under the Maryland statute because she did not lose any money while playing in the Casino. [read post]