Search for: "Robert v. Department of Insurance" Results 341 - 360 of 696
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Sep 2016, 3:25 pm by Josh Blackman
The purpose of the penalty, as the government explained to the Supreme Court in NFIB v. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 2:35 pm by Mark Walsh
Alito Jr. and Chief Justice Roberts take little digs at the operation of the health-insurance exchanges under the ACA. [read post]
4 Dec 2009, 3:10 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Lackawanna County Judge Robert Mazzoni also allowed for a UIM claim to proceed in a consolidated fashion with a bad faith claim in Augustine v. [read post]
23 Jun 2015, 7:31 am by Amy Howe
” In The New York Times, The Upshot illustrates what it describes as the Roberts Court’s “surprising move leftward. [read post]
10 Nov 2012, 2:14 pm by Law Lady
MADISON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT and DOWN HOME MEDICAL, Appellees. 1st District.Dissolution of marriage -- Child custody -- Appeals -- Jurisdiction -- Trial court was without jurisdiction to vacate modification order while an appeal of that very order was pending? [read post]
17 Dec 2007, 4:40 am
Clark & Department of Workforce Development - Dietrich Industries seeks a reversal of the Unemployment Insurance Review Board's ruling that its union workers were entitled to unemployment benefits during a lockout. [read post]
1 Dec 2020, 10:35 am by Anna Salvatore
” The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this morning in Nestlé USA v. [read post]
3 Mar 2020, 3:40 am by Edith Roberts
” For The Washington Post (subscription required), Robert Barnes reports that during oral argument yesterday in a second immigration case, Department of Homeland Security v. [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 4:37 am by David DePaolo
The Appellate Division's 3rd Department rejected Kigin's challenge to the board's pre-authorization scheme, arguing that the board had exceeded the Legislature's grant of authority in enacting the regulations, and that the regulations were in conflict with their enabling legislation. [read post]