Search for: "Fast v. Fast" Results 4661 - 4680 of 6,851
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Feb 2012, 7:44 am by Yvonne Daly
Supreme Court judgments are coming thick and fast at the moment as two of the members of the bench (Finnegan and Macken JJ.) are set to retire at the end of the month. [read post]
26 Feb 2012, 2:10 pm
Two fishermen aboard 81-foot F/V PLAN B sent a call to the Coast Guard Sector Northern New England, reporting that they were taking on water about eight miles off Kennebunkport, Maine, and that their pumps were not working fast enough to keep them from flooding, in weather noted to be two-foot seas with winds up to 15 knots. [read post]
26 Feb 2012, 12:55 pm by Ron
Peck issued an important ruling in Monique Da Silva Moore v. [read post]
24 Feb 2012, 1:51 am by TJ McIntyre
Yesterday's Supreme Court decision in Damache v. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 11:30 pm by Donna Bader
Appellate court holds plaintiffs not required to comply with C.C.P. 425.13 when suing a health care plan by Donna Bader In  Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 1:48 pm
 Of course, by then, President Santorum's Supreme Court appointees may have overruled the portion of Buckley v. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 6:58 am by Bart Torvik
 And so the case finally came to a close.Not so fast! [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 9:50 am by P.J. Blount
A/AC.105/C.1/2012/INF/41) With Commercial Space Transportation Conference, FAA shoots for the stars – Fast Lane FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conf. [read post]
19 Feb 2012, 12:37 pm by dblewin
The proposed legislation would offer a fast-track approval process for drugs targeting rare diseases without a current cure, an avenue currently lacking.[4] The PDUFA V authorization process would be an ideal forum for discussion and, hopefully, adoption of these and other improvements on the FDA drug approval system [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 8:16 am by Jeffrey A. Quinn
“Not so fast,” said the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in its recent decision in Rolfs, et al. v. [read post]