Search for: "Force v. Department of Revenue"
Results 641 - 660
of 713
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 May 2010, 6:30 am
The total includes the aforementioned reductions at the Department of Education. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 11:23 am
The ABC Test vs. the IRS Independent Contractor Test The Internal Revenue Service uses a different, less inclusive test to determine if an individual is an employee or an independent contractor. [read post]
8 Apr 2010, 12:49 pm
For the People Theatres of NY, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2010, 12:53 pm
Legal structure (corporation v partnership) just a wrapper. [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 7:34 pm
First, it is necessary to identify how a hospital generates its revenue. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 2:47 pm
The project has been delayed at the state level as the Gamesa, the energy company behind the plans, is seeking approval from the Department of Environmental Protection for a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 12:38 am
§1983 excessive-force claims against prisoners are to be weighed based on nature of force, not extent of injury (per curiam) " Thaler v. [read post]
8 Feb 2010, 5:01 am
” Though she gives no citation so that one can determine which Supreme Court case she wants to highlight, she surely is referring to Quill Corp. v. [read post]
31 Jan 2010, 7:16 pm
Justice Department announced today. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 5:19 pm
Jos Dumortier http://www.icri.be/ | Subcontractor: Lawfort [since disbanded] - ICT Law Department, Belgium, Head: prof. [read post]
29 Dec 2009, 10:29 am
The first draft of that settlement, which would allow Google to scan and display in copyright but out-of-print books in exchange for a slice of the revenue, was scuttled earlier this year after the Department of Justice filed objected to elements of it. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 2:18 am
Good television programs with intelligent, well-written scripts and capable actors are becoming progressively more costly to produce while the station's revenue are decreasing due to an increasingly lower demand in television advertising [37], the sole means by which broadcast stations bring in revenue. [38] Comcast's move may be just what both companies need in order to bounce back. [read post]
28 Nov 2009, 4:34 am
The Court of Appeals' 5-1 decision in Walton v. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 12:29 am
The ruling in Tafas v. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 3:59 pm
Their respective teams would lose revenues, inter alia, from attendance, merchandise sales, and general team goodwill. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 6:25 am
(IP Dragon) Colombia Legal victory for Coca Cola over trade mark (IP tango) Denmark Danish Supreme Court affirms decision forcing food stall operator using ORIENTEXPRESSEN to change her trade mark (Class 46) Europe Questions on acquiescence for ECJ in Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc (Class 46) (IPKat) EWHC questions referred to ECJ in L'Oréal SA v eBay now available on Curia (Class 46) Disruptive… [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 5:25 am
(IP Dragon) Colombia Legal victory for Coca Cola over trade mark (IP tango) Denmark Danish Supreme Court affirms decision forcing food stall operator using ORIENTEXPRESSEN to change her trade mark (Class 46) Europe Questions on acquiescence for ECJ in Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc (Class 46) (IPKat) EWHC questions referred to ECJ in L'Oréal SA v eBay now available on Curia (Class 46) Disruptive innovations: aspects of German and… [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 5:25 am
(IP Dragon) Colombia Legal victory for Coca Cola over trade mark (IP tango) Denmark Danish Supreme Court affirms decision forcing food stall operator using ORIENTEXPRESSEN to change her trade mark (Class 46) Europe Questions on acquiescence for ECJ in Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc (Class 46) (IPKat) EWHC questions referred to ECJ in L'Oréal SA v eBay now available on Curia (Class 46) Disruptive innovations: aspects of German and… [read post]
12 Oct 2009, 5:31 am
Insignia Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Oct 2009, 3:03 am
It reads as follows:(a) Armed Forces-(1) EMPLOYMENT- In this Act, the term `employment' does not apply to the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces.(2) ARMED FORCES- In paragraph (1) the term `Armed Forces' means the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard.Subsection (iv) - State Officials, Political Appointees and Staff(iv) an employee or applicant to which section 717(a) of the Civil Rights Act of… [read post]
