Search for: "P. v. Long"
Results 4361 - 4380
of 7,175
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jul 2012, 5:23 am
What about those who argue that budgets are annual and as long as the reserve contribution at the end of the year matches the amount budgeted, no borrowing has occurred? [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 2:31 pm
So any power exercised under the N&P Clause cannot be self-standing. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 5:00 am
Guest Blogger: Evan P. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 4:57 am
Crowell v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 2:42 pm
Mann at p. 4 (Westlaw cite). [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 12:36 pm
Janky v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 12:31 pm
Another group of courts found that the exclusion was ambiguous or required to be interpreted based on history of the exclusion and looked at the presentations of the insurance industry to the various insurance commissioners in the various states “Doer v. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 9:16 am
P L A I N L Y wrong. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 11:00 am
We have come a long way. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 6:25 pm
I’ll start with Parker v. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 11:09 am
" Johnson at p. 15. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 1:02 am
Colin P. [read post]
1 Jul 2012, 10:10 am
”No doubt there is a long and interesting story to this litigation and there are hints of this in the judgment. [read post]
1 Jul 2012, 2:54 am
Claim 1 was one of those lovely claims that seem to exist only in the metallurgical arts (and this Kat adores the “balance of unavoidable impurities” that often appears in such claims): Use of a steel in laser welding, in which the laser welding is done to a section of the steel plate cut by laser cutting, plasma cutting or gas cutting without removing scales, the steel containing, by weight %, 0.01 to 0.20% of C, 0.01 to 1.5% of Si, 0.2 to 2.0% of… [read post]
30 Jun 2012, 10:52 am
In Cory v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 2:46 pm
The Roberts opinion joins McCulloch v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 12:17 pm
This clarifies an aspect of South Dakota v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:20 pm
Coito v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 8:32 am
On that question, the Court held that the provision is constitutional as long as states would only lose new funds if they didn't comply with the new requirements, rather than all of their funding. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 8:10 am
Supreme Court granted certiorari in Marx v. [read post]
