Search for: "State v. Two Hearts" Results 521 - 540 of 4,761
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Aug 2017, 4:39 am by Edith Roberts
” At Balkinization, Marty Lederman unpacks the federalism questions at the heart of Christie v. [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 12:43 am by ASAD KHAN
At the heart of the statutory provisions is the concept of a “qualifying child”, i.e. a person defined in s 117D who is under the age of 18 and who is either a British citizen or has lived in the UK for a continuous period of seven years or more. [read post]
23 Feb 2009, 2:41 am
However, there are differences between the laws of the two states that created a conflict. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 2:29 pm by Jim Gerl
  The court stated that an IEP is a snapshot not a retrospective. [read post]
14 May 2015, 5:46 pm by Jim Gerl
  The court stated that an IEP is a snapshot not a retrospective. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 3:46 pm by Glen C. Hansen
District Courts, how will federal judges handle the disputed state law property questions that will likely be at the heart of many of those claims? [read post]
15 Apr 2013, 11:40 am by Dennis Crouch
By Dennis Crouch Association for Molecular Pathology v. [read post]
23 Jan 2020, 2:25 pm
Whether that merger immunizes Nidec from liability that it might have otherwise had prior to the merger raises the issue that is at the heart of this appeal. [read post]
27 Dec 2012, 3:47 pm by Bexis
Instead a duty-to-withdraw claim strikes at the heart of the FDA’s power to determine what prescription drugs are properly sold in interstate commerce in the United States:[A] state law duty that would compel generic manufacturers to stop production of a drug that under federal law they have the authority to produce . . . would directly conflict with the federal statutory scheme in which Congress vested sole authority with the FDA to determine whether a drug may be… [read post]
23 Apr 2018, 3:41 am by Peter Mahler
Recently, in two separate cases, two New York judges construing two LLC agreements of two LLCs formed under the laws of two different states — Delaware and Nevada — came to the same conclusion when faced with the same argument by the LLCs’ controllers who contended that minority members waived the right to institute litigation asserting derivative claims based on provisions in the agreements… [read post]