Search for: "Supreme Court U.S.A."
Results 401 - 420
of 666
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Feb 2012, 12:28 pm
Dennis of New York was a former attorney who kept up with the legal news, read the Supreme Court's opinion, and decided that it would be a good idea for the Episcopal Church (USA) to follow Justice Blackmun's advice. [read post]
11 May 2017, 8:48 am
As explained below, we hold that they can. (...)This doctrine is deeply rooted in Supreme Court precedent. [read post]
30 Dec 2014, 6:47 am
Here, the court analyzed the association’s challenge to the validity of the DOL rule under the two-step analytical framework laid out in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 4:37 pm
Thus, although the Forest Park appeal deals with a “made-in-the-U.S.A. [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 11:36 am
(citing Lois Sportswear, U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2020, 5:31 pm
That means the Court’s review is based on the agency record and the agency decision will be reversed if it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law.The way the Court reviews whether a regulation is consistent with law is, for now, based on the Supreme Court decision in Chevron, U.S.A. v. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 7:13 am
(U.S.A.), No. 09-3682, 2011 WL 285156 (7th Cir. [read post]
27 Jul 2022, 4:10 am
The Supreme Court's June 2022 decision in West Virginia v. [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 4:28 am
In support of their motion, they submitted a decision and order of this Court dated November 19, 2014, which, inter alia, vacated the judgment of divorce and remitted the matter to the Supreme Court to allow the plaintiff to obtain new counsel in the divorce actions and to conduct further discovery (see Buongiovanni v Buongiovanni, 122 AD3d 786). [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 4:49 pm
The Supreme Court held that trademark law did not prohibit the defendant from using the plaintiff’s mark “collaterally, not to indicate the goods, but to say that the trade-marked product is a constituent in the article now offered as new and changed. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 4:15 pm
§ 774.17) is entitled to deference under Chevron U.S.A. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 9:30 pm
Chevron U.S.A. v. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 5:57 am
The SEC, in turn, argued that its interpretation was consistent with its JOBS Act mandate and thus satisfied the statutory construction standards enunciated by the Supreme Court in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
13 Sep 2008, 12:51 am
Chevron U.S.A. [read post]
18 Oct 2019, 6:09 am
”[12] Given that both the Supreme Court and the D.C. [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 8:44 am
” The court quoted the state Supreme Court’s decision in Dukes v. [read post]
8 Oct 2011, 8:44 am
” The court quoted the state Supreme Court’s decision in Dukes v. [read post]
23 Feb 2017, 8:06 pm
Chevron U.S.A., Inc., Jan. 26, 2017, Mississippi Supreme Court More Blog Entries: Entila v. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 7:30 am
Certain district courts have concluded that the statute contains an ambiguity that warrants deference to the SEC rule under Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
12 Oct 2017, 8:39 am
Florida 16-9448 Issues: (1) Whether, when a Florida jury recommended a death sentence before the Supreme Court decided Hurst v. [read post]
