Search for: "State v. Dollar"
Results 4301 - 4320
of 9,575
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Dec 2015, 4:00 am
(See for example, MDG Computers Canada Inc. et al. v. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 12:25 am
Guyana Former Minister of Home Affairs Gail Teixeira is defending herself against a GUY$10 million (US$ 49,096) dollar lawsuit filed by her predecessor Ronald Gajraj, following the release of incriminating US diplomatic cable by Wikileaks. [read post]
2 May 2023, 9:01 pm
Wade in Dobbs v. [read post]
21 Dec 2021, 5:40 am
See Star Buick v. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 10:47 am
Miles Technology, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 2:23 am
Doing so could save you tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars or more. [read post]
2 May 2017, 9:42 am
United States, United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 4:29 am
In People v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 4:29 am
In People v. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 4:10 am
[Spier v. [read post]
7 Mar 2023, 3:00 am
SE v. [read post]
1 Jun 2015, 8:00 am
” Citing its recent decision in United States v. [read post]
13 Nov 2014, 11:26 am
The Pennsylvania case is Wisniewski v. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 9:01 pm
The Justice Department’s analysis states that since the Supreme Court’s 1910 ruling in Hass v Henkel and its 1924 ruling in Hammererschmidt v. [read post]
4 May 2020, 3:58 am
Patent and Trademark Office v. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 10:03 am
In opposition to the motion, Plaintiffs submitted a declaration from an economist stating that the cost of an expert analysis necessary to prove the antitrust claims would be “at least several hundred thousand dollars,” while the maximum recovery for an individual plaintiff would be $12,850, or $38,549 when trebled. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 10:03 am
In opposition to the motion, Plaintiffs submitted a declaration from an economist stating that the cost of an expert analysis necessary to prove the antitrust claims would be “at least several hundred thousand dollars,” while the maximum recovery for an individual plaintiff would be $12,850, or $38,549 when trebled. [read post]
15 Jan 2010, 5:16 pm
See, e.g., O’Brien, 350 F.3d at 288 (holding that a ten-dollar night-shift increase precluded application of the FWW); Ayers v. [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 1:51 pm
F.T.C. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2018, 4:51 pm
The plaintiff’s actual loss for cost of any given stream or download would likely be a few dollars at the most, so even $100 seem like a stretch – but Parliament has made this minimum if this provision is invoked. [read post]
