Search for: "York v. Daniels" Results 681 - 700 of 1,918
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Sep 2017, 7:10 am by Jonathan H. Adler
Some, such as the University of Chicago’s Daniel Hemel, have argued that rescission of DACA requires notice and comment. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 5:32 am by Eugene Volokh
I’m delighted to say that yesterday, our pro bono local counsel Daniel Schmutter (Hartman & Winnicki) — many thanks to him! [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 6:03 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The Court of Appeals says there is no case.The case is Basinski v. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 3:39 am by Peter Mahler
  In Tzolis v Wolff, New York’s highest court recognized a common-law right of LLC members to sue derivatively on behalf of the LLC. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 3:39 am by Peter Mahler
  In Tzolis v Wolff, New York’s highest court recognized a common-law right of LLC members to sue derivatively on behalf of the LLC. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 6:27 am by Scott Bomboy
But Georgetown Law professor Marty Lederman told the New York Times that the arguments won’t hold weight. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 4:30 am by Ben
Daniels, in the US District Court for Southern New York, said the company could not claim ownership of the footage as Bernstein did not himself film the concert, instead signing over the rights to do so to Nems. [read post]
2 Aug 2017, 7:00 am by Ed Stein
And as the Supreme Court held the 1983 case Immigration and Naturalization Service v. [read post]
23 Jul 2017, 9:20 pm by Series of Essays
Daniel, The Regulatory Review In Kokesh v. [read post]
16 Jul 2017, 4:23 pm by INFORRM
Daniel Khalili-Tari in The London Economic has questioned whether ‘social homogeneity [is] ruining journalism. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 8:52 pm by Jim Sedor
The Deep Industry Ties of Trump’s Deregulation TeamsNew York Times – Danielle Ivory and Robert Faturechi | Published: 7/11/2017 President Trump entered office pledging to cut red tape, and within weeks he ordered his administration to assemble teams to aggressively scale back government regulations. [read post]