Search for: "Banks v. District of Columbia" Results 21 - 40 of 579
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Jul 2014, 10:24 am by Cynthia L. Hackerott
Adopting the bulk of a magistrate’s recommendations, the federal district court for the District of Columbia has ruled that substantial evidence supported a DOL Administrative Review Board (ARB) decision — finding that Bank of America (BOA) consented to the desk audit portion of an OFCCP compliance review and that there was specific evidence of a violation of Executive Order (EO) 11246 to support the OFCCP’s decision to conduct an on-site review.… [read post]
16 Nov 2012, 6:58 am by Leland E. Beck
In yesterday’s episode of the Medicare hospital disproportionate share (DSH) payment saga, the United States District Court for the for the District of Columbia vacated a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “policy” adopted in a 2004 final rule preamble that was not adopted as a rule until 2007. [read post]
19 Sep 2023, 10:00 am
Anti-SLAPP Act that it had reserved a few months earlier.1 In Banks v. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 7:29 pm
The November 14, 2011 ruling from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the matter Purcell v. [read post]
16 May 2012, 11:38 am by Douglas Melcher
On May 10, 2012, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals decided Nader v. [read post]
25 Nov 2006, 9:20 am
Some quotes:The federal government and the banking industry will square off next week in the Supreme Court against all 50 states and the District of Columbia in a mortgage-lending case that could have broad implications for business regulation. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 5:08 pm by Paul Karlsgodt
National Australia Bank, Ltd., No. 07-0583-cv (2d Cir. 2008). [read post]
21 Mar 2014, 9:47 am by Sean Cornely
On February 11th, the three private plaintiff-appellants and eleven State plaintiff-appellants in State National Bank of Big Spring, et al. v. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 3:00 am by Louis M. Solomon
Third, the Court determined that it has power to transfer the claims against the Bank to the Southern District of New York even if venue and personal jurisdiction were missing in the District Court for the District of Columbia, relying on 28 U.S.C. sec. 1406(a) and Goldlawr, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2008, 1:20 pm
The fact a different judge in the District of Columbia later drew a different conclusion on whether probable existed after the search occurred did not mean that there was not probable cause when the warrant issued. [read post]