Search for: "Public Service Co. v. State" Results 3361 - 3380 of 5,844
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 May 2014, 11:03 am by Brian E. Barreira
In the case of Walker, the offending language was: “The Trustee is prohibited from spending sums of interest or principal to [Walker] for her benefit for services which are otherwise available under any public entitlement program of the United States of America, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, or any political subdivision thereof. [read post]
15 May 2014, 6:53 pm by Lisa Milam-Perez
The challenged provision required employees, whenever they published “work-related information” online and identified themselves as Kroger employees, to include a disclaimer stating “the postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the postings, strategies, or opinion of the Kroger Co. family of stores. [read post]
15 May 2014, 10:00 am by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Employersyand fiduciaries of 401(k) plans should take note of the potential need to adopt a mid-year amendment to their plans to comply with new guidance of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) concerning the need to timely amend their plans to comply with IRS recent guidance on when their plans must afford same-sex partners treatment equivalent to opposite-sex married couples issued in response to the Supreme Court’s decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in… [read post]
15 May 2014, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
Co., 88 NY2d 869, and [2] that the violation must be of the kind that "creates a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety," citing Remba v Federation Empl. [read post]
13 May 2014, 5:04 am by The Public Employment Law Press
In the event that the provider does not collect the co-payment, it has provided a medical service for $80, not $100, and the State should have paid only $64 of that cost. [read post]
8 May 2014, 2:50 pm by Rick St. Hilaire
[the] defendants and other unindicted co-conspirators, conspired and agreed with each other to knowingly and intentionally defraudthe United States, for the purpose of  impeding, impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful Government functions of the Internal Revenue Service ... [read post]
8 May 2014, 4:00 am by Lyonette Louis-Jacques
Canada-Cameroon BIT signing; photo from DFATD In Hupacasath First Nation v. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 6:22 am by Natalie Nicol
Judge Furman began his analysis with a discussion of Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 6:22 am by Natalie Nicol
Judge Furman began his analysis with a discussion of Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 6:22 am by Natalie Nicol
Judge Furman began his analysis with a discussion of Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 6:22 am by Natalie Nicol
Judge Furman began his analysis with a discussion of Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 4:57 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Weil previously was Professor of Markets, Public Policy and Law and the Everett W. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 11:00 am by Wells Bennett
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces demonstrated in U.S. v. [read post]
26 Apr 2014, 10:38 am by Robert Kreisman
  Finally, the appeals court stated that while consumers may prefer to avoid bundling of services in many instances, the tie is not illegal or unfair in all cases. [read post]