Search for: "*u. S. v. Price"
Results 341 - 360
of 871
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 May 2013, 2:25 pm
Paul, as well as a second qui tam complaint pending against the City, in exchange for the City’s commitment to withdraw its appeal in Magner v. [read post]
18 Aug 2010, 4:33 pm
The statute's express language indicates plaintiff's right to have the purchase price stated in a definite sum is not an unwaivable right. [read post]
19 Dec 2013, 10:20 am
Supreme Court held in Florence v. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 3:09 pm
In Henson v. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 12:49 pm
In dissent in Petrella v. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 6:32 am
However, the disclosure is not required to include the pricing terms of the trading arrangement. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 6:32 am
However, the disclosure is not required to include the pricing terms of the trading arrangement. [read post]
28 Jan 2008, 5:22 am
U. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 3:30 am
“[U]ncertainty concerning future events should not bar attempts to assign value to an asset” (Burns v Burns, 84 NY2d 369, 375 [1974]). [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 7:07 am
The court also rejected Cooke’s objection to the admittance of unrelated emails, including some to an alleged 16-year-old, saying Cooke’s response (“that’s cool that ur young, but i don’t want u to narc”) was further evidence of his propensity and not hearsay. [read post]
5 Mar 2014, 2:50 pm
The Court’s decision is due before the end of the Court’s current term in June. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 10:17 am
Medtronic, Inc., 496 U. [read post]
15 Jun 2022, 11:34 am
Whether petitioners' suit challenging HHS's adjustments is precluded by 42 U. [read post]
14 Oct 2011, 11:07 am
S. 601, 306 U. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 9:12 am
Don’t believe us, or even Wikipedia, here’s the link to Time Magazine’s 2013 “chargemaster” cover article that discussed medical billing and price inflation. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 9:18 am
Cases like Rust v. [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 7:21 am
Board of Regents of Univ. of Okla., 468 U. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 6:19 am
Keurig, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Mar 2021, 9:40 am
Supreme Court issued numerous landmark decisions in 2020, among those—for trademark scholars and practitioners—Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 4:12 pm
Plaintiffs have not identified any product that is priced based on a purchaser's intended use, nor is the Court aware of such a product. [read post]
