Search for: "State v. Code"
Results 5181 - 5200
of 27,231
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Oct 2022, 2:42 pm
Bissonnette v. [read post]
5 Feb 2007, 9:21 am
" That maximum is the one set by Congress in the United States Code. [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 1:28 am
The Court stated that California state courts have not embraced the Ninth Circuit’s narrow restraint exception and stated “no reported California state court decision has endorsed the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning, and we are of the view that California courts have been clear in their expression that section 16660 represents a strong public policy of the state which should not be diluted by judicial fiat” (citing Scott… [read post]
22 May 2008, 2:42 pm
In Rosalio Pedraza v. [read post]
6 Apr 2009, 3:30 am
Code § 230(e)(3) specifically says "no liability may be imposed under any State . . . law that is inconsistent with" 47 U.S. [read post]
21 Jul 2017, 9:12 am
(Williams v. [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 11:18 am
Siegel, 571 U.S. 415 (2014) (holding that a bankruptcy court has “necessary or appropriate” authority to carry out provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, however, in exercising this authority, a bankruptcy court may not contravene specific statutory provisions of the Bankruptcy Code). [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 11:18 am
Siegel, 571 U.S. 415 (2014) (holding that a bankruptcy court has “necessary or appropriate” authority to carry out provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, however, in exercising this authority, a bankruptcy court may not contravene specific statutory provisions of the Bankruptcy Code). [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 6:53 am
Politico is reporting: That 15 personnel were “disciplined” as a result of United States v. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 3:48 pm
About six weeks ago, I blogged about the Army Court of Criminal Appeals' July decision in United States v. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 3:19 pm
See Garcia v. [read post]
19 Oct 2015, 9:53 am
Thomas v. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 2:39 pm
(Eugene Volokh) From McMillan v. [read post]
23 Sep 2008, 3:42 am
The United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, Judge Eginton, has ruled in the case of E.K. v. [read post]
14 Jun 2007, 1:49 pm
United States v. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 3:09 am
Also, most construction contracts contain some general duty clause that states the contractor will perform its work according to all applicable codes, laws, and regulations. [read post]
31 Aug 2017, 3:09 am
Also, most construction contracts contain some general duty clause that states the contractor will perform its work according to all applicable codes, laws, and regulations. [read post]
24 Mar 2023, 10:48 am
This latter holding may therefore be undone by California state courts, and this precise issue is before the California Supreme Court in Adolph v. [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 9:01 pm
Pennzoil-Quaker State Co. v. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 9:46 am
See United States v. [read post]
