Search for: "State v. Plan"
Results 6781 - 6800
of 29,605
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jun 2019, 9:51 am
The dissent found the answer in Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 4:00 am
State v New York State Dept. of Civ. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 10:38 am
United States (1989), United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2013, 10:06 am
”); Day v. [read post]
13 Dec 2022, 5:37 pm
It also does not matter what the applicable plan documents state. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 2:31 pm
Supreme Court in Griggs v. [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 9:35 am
Willock, in which a New Mexico wedding photographer has asked the Court to review a state court’s decision that the company violated a state anti-discrimination law when it rejected a request to take photos of a same-sex commitment ceremony. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 3:21 pm
” Bethman v. [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 9:01 pm
State legislatures have discretion to set tax and spending priorities, the Supreme Court said in 1977 in United States Trust Co. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 1:34 pm
” The UAW will undoubtedly attest to this notion following the decision earlier this year from the Fourth Circuit in Barbour, et al. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 6:48 pm
The first argument seems easily dealt with by the government: Almost no transaction is beyond the Commerce Clause after the New Deal case Wickard v. [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 10:31 am
State of Indiana (NFP) Enri Franklin v. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 9:47 am
As the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware) just reaffirmed, in the context of an ERISA plan that offers employees the option of investing in a fund consisting solely of the employer's own securities, there is a "presumption that a fiduciary acted prudently in investing in employer securities" and that, to rebut the presumption, "a 'plaintiff must show that the ERISA fiduciary could not… [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 9:42 am
However, states planning projects that pose risks of significant transboundary environmental harm (or threaten shared natural resources) shoulder a significant obligation of due diligence to ensure the environment or resources are protected from harm. [read post]
1 Mar 2023, 7:42 am
If the plan is to proceed, the administrator should check that the requisite notice had been given to the Secretary of State and, if not, give such notice. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 5:00 am
In her article, Professor Mullenix examines the upcoming United States Supreme Court decision in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. [read post]
5 Nov 2013, 3:28 am
Swatch AG v. [read post]
9 Sep 2022, 12:37 pm
That rule, deriving from Zervos v. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 9:25 am
Abbott Citizens for Environmental Responsibility v State of California (March 26, 2014, C070836) ___ Cal.App.4th ___.The 14th District Agricultural Association operates the Santa Cruz County fairgrounds outside of Watsonville. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:30 am
For example, the court in United States v. [read post]
