Search for: "Price v. State of Illinois" Results 421 - 440 of 836
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Aug 2019, 5:45 am by Kevin Kaufman
For instance, Maryland permits local governments to provide a credit for expanding manufacturing facilities.[6] Similarly, Idaho allows counties to exempt TPP that is part of an investment of at least $500,000 in a new manufacturing plant for up to five years.[7] Seven states (Delaware, Hawaii,  Illinois, Iowa, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania)  exempt all TPP from taxation, while another five states (Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota,  and… [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 3:26 pm by slkimbro
After a long a tedious approval process, one state may permit the new advertising method/pricing structure only to have the state next door prohibit the same exact activity. [read post]
7 Oct 2009, 11:16 am
Based in Oakbrook Terrace and Chicago, we represent clients of all sizes throughout the states of Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, and throughout the United States. [read post]
16 May 2019, 9:05 pm by Bobby Chen
Holden of Oklahoma State University discussed the regulation of sports betting following the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. [read post]
24 Sep 2013, 7:05 pm by Mary Dwyer
Concord EFS, Inc. 13-63Issue: Whether a plaintiff who purchases directly from a member of a price-fixing conspiracy is necessarily a “direct purchaser” under Illinois Brick Co. v. [read post]
18 May 2014, 5:59 am by Omar Ha-Redeye
The Supreme Court of Canada stated in Atlantic Paper Stock Ltd. v. [read post]
16 Jul 2017, 7:49 am by Eric Goldman
Google cannot dismiss Illinois Biometrics Privacy Act lawsuit over face scanning of photos. * Jeffrey Neuburger: A Host of Biometric Privacy/Facial Recognition Bills Currently Circulating in State Legislatures * Mey v. [read post]
27 Dec 2023, 9:40 am by Eric Goldman
Cremation Society of Illinois, No. 22-1641 (7th Cir. [read post]
26 Jul 2014, 8:32 am by Eric Goldman
” * Seyfarth Shaw: Social Media Privacy Legislation state-by-state summary * K.W. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2008, 4:50 am
The Court saw the license denial as an effort by New York to horde a resource and thereby keep prices for its consumers low.Edwards v California (1941) considered a challenge to a California law aimed at reducing the influx of dustbowl indigents to the state. [read post]