Search for: "State v. Light"
Results 7021 - 7040
of 26,003
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Mar 2011, 5:27 am
For the reasons stated above, I find equitable tolling of plaintiffs’ FLSA claims warranted in light of the procedural history of this case. [read post]
29 Dec 2008, 3:38 pm
That's even more puzzling in light of the FC's also recent decision in Rentrop v. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 3:28 am
See Timpte Industries Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2016, 12:43 pm
This post was authored by Liara Silva and Alysha Stein-Manes Last month, the California Court of Appeal issued a decision in Caldecott v. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 2:25 pm
In June, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in City of Ontario v. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that planning authorities could… [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:19 pm
The Court noted the High Court decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 2866 (Admin) that revocation of the plan by excecutive action was unlawful and also the Court of Appeal decision in R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2011] EWCA Civ 639 that the intended revocation of the regional plan was a material factor that planning authorities could… [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 12:43 am
R (Imran Bashir) v. [read post]
2 Apr 2008, 3:53 am
Case Name: Pendleton v. [read post]
2 Apr 2008, 3:53 am
Case Name: Pendleton v. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 2:51 pm
The article states that, since 1997, federal courts have determined that Department of Justice attorneys violated laws or ethical rules in some 201 cases, including the duty expressed by Supreme Court Justice George Sutherland over 70 years ago in Berger v. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 8:07 am
Cir. 2001) (stating that inoperable embodiments present “an issue of enablement, and not indefiniteness”); Miles Labs., Inc. v. [read post]
26 May 2020, 8:57 pm
NPRM to Codify Existing Practices with Notable Exception The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking today to update its rules to conform to SAS Institute Inc. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 1:25 pm
, United States v. [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 11:38 am
The final rule is especially important for providers in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Armstrong v. [read post]
20 May 2011, 10:19 am
(Orin Kerr) The Eleventh Circuit has handed down a new en banc decision, Gilbert v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 3:41 am
In State v. [read post]
8 Sep 2008, 9:41 pm
Here is the abstract:In Panetti v. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 12:16 pm
The new enforcement guidance “supersedes” the EEOC’s July 2014 guidance on pregnancy discrimination and in particular, amends the agency’s earlier interpretation of disparate treatment and light duty work due to Young v. [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 3:19 am
Mongolian Government [2005] EWCA Civ 395; and (ii) Wuhan Guoyu Logistics Group Co Lt v. [read post]
