Search for: "State v. Holland" Results 661 - 680 of 1,027
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Aug 2011, 9:53 am by John Mikhail
It is the only part of the Necessary and Proper Clause quoted by Chief Justice Marshall in United States v. [read post]
21 Jul 2011, 1:03 pm by Kenneth J. Vanko
From the State of South Dakota (home to the Badlands, Custer State Park and - of course - Wall Drug) comes a family dispute in the business of selling farm implement equipment. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 5:09 am by Susan Brenner
According to the original Complaint, RealTimeBid.Com, LLC (`RTB’) is a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Ohio, having its principal place of business in Holland, Ohio. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 12:43 pm by Peter Spiro
Second, it's not as if Washington is imposing many international obligations on the states even with Holland on the books. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 7:42 am by Kara OBrien
The FPPC then states that by analogy this guidance applies to consulting work that an investment adviser provides to a California state pension plan, meaning that under the “limited circumstances of performing trades” for a state pension plan “under its direction,” the employees performing those trades would not need to register as lobbyists. [read post]
26 May 2011, 3:02 pm by Kent Scheidegger
  For example, the issue not decided in Teague was resolved shortly thereafter in Holland v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 5:00 am by Kevin
From a complaint filed last week in San Francisco:  Michael M ____ v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 8:06 am by Jonathan H. Adler
Holland Hardaway was convicted of murder and given consecutive 40 to 80 year prison terms. [read post]
9 May 2011, 12:31 am by INFORRM
[Update] On 6 May 2011 Mr Justice Tugendhat gave judgment in the case of Bacon v Automattic [2011] EWHC 1072 (QB) – a Norwich Pharmacal application in which he held that the operators of WordPress and Wikipedia could be served with the order in the United States by Email. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
 At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant. [read post]