Search for: "Porter v. District of Columbia"
Results 41 - 50
of 50
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2010, 7:49 pm
He started as a claims manager in 1927, and his career grew along with the Company, as it expanded to be a multi-line insurer writing policies in 11 states and the District of Columbia. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 4:42 pm
— Imelda V. [read post]
December 21, 2009 – Environmental Law Settlements, Decisions, Regulatory Actions and Lawsuit Filings
21 Dec 2009, 10:57 am
— Imelda V. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 2:05 am
Sterling Drug, Inc., 416 F.2d 417, 426 (2d Cir. 1969).District of Columbia: McNeil Pharmaceutical v. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 5:30 pm
See generally Bexis' book §2.04[1] at footnote 17 (collecting state-of-the-art citations from drug and device cases in 35 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico).So that's one thing - one pretty big thing - that we think is wrong with the anti-preemption rationale in Tucker II. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 10:00 pm
District of Columbia, 747 A.2d 138145 (D.C. 2000); Mervin v. [read post]
9 Feb 2008, 4:11 pm
On February 6, I was leaving one of the main District of Columbia government office buildings. [read post]
27 Nov 2007, 12:01 pm
Box 1698 Jackson, MS 39215 Phone: (601) 987-4872 (V/TTY); (800) 852-8328 (V/TTY/Toll Free in MS) Web: http://www.msprojectstart.org T.K. [read post]
18 Nov 2007, 7:48 am
Box 308 Yorktown, IN 47396 Phone: (800) 589-1121 (Toll Free) Web: http://www.area6.org Bureau of Aging and In-Home Services 402 West Washington Street, E-431 Indianapolis, IN 46207 Phone: (317) 232-7020; (800) 352-4800 (Toll Free) Fax: (317) 233-3475 Web: http://www.state.in.us/fssa/elderly/aging/index.html AARP Indiana One North Capitol Avenue, Suite 1275 Indianapolis, IN 46204-2025 Phone: (317) 423-2277 Fax: (317) 423-2211 or 2299 E-mail: inaarp@aarp.org Web: http://www.aarp.orgstates/in … [read post]
4 Jul 2007, 6:04 pm
Eleven months after ruling that taxing damage awards for nonphysical compensatory damages violated the United States Constitution, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has reversed itself in Murphy v. [read post]
