Search for: "Fair v. State"
Results 7861 - 7880
of 27,418
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Mar 2019, 9:15 am
Co. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2020, 8:49 am
Motion for continuance, granted in part.Delta T, LLC v. [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 8:59 am
We will continue to watch the goings on at the State Capitol and will report any changes to roll back past changes to Colorado law. [read post]
18 Feb 2025, 12:44 pm
In People v. [read post]
1 Jul 2012, 10:10 am
There are some very nice and straightforward clarifications in the recent Federal Court decision inWarman v. [read post]
8 Aug 2018, 1:51 pm
Several patent-related cases, Oil States Energy Services v. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 2:26 pm
On a motion by President Shrum, the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma dismissed the suit for lack of standing, ruling that the United States Supreme Court in Summers v. [read post]
7 Jul 2016, 6:29 am
It is styled, Larry Frederick v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:42 am
The FCA states that:[19] It is not disputed that if Circum’s calculations had been accepted, this would represent a sizeable increase in the royalties to be paid to Access, which it estimates to represent approximately $500,000.00 per year, or $3 million dollars over the two tariff periods. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:42 am
The FCA states that:[19] It is not disputed that if Circum’s calculations had been accepted, this would represent a sizeable increase in the royalties to be paid to Access, which it estimates to represent approximately $500,000.00 per year, or $3 million dollars over the two tariff periods. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 5:05 pm
In the case of Almeida Leitão Bento Fernandes v. [read post]
20 Apr 2022, 7:09 am
We have a fair amount of movement on the relist rolls this week. [read post]
7 May 2007, 8:22 am
" The first post, regarding the state of the docket, is here. [read post]
16 Nov 2013, 6:23 am
Their hope, is that fair game will be established between brand name and generic manufacturers—and that means equal liability.FDA’s movement for parity stems from the contentious ruling of Pliva v Mensing, 131 2 Ch 2357 (2011). [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 2:24 pm
Somewhat like Fairey v. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 6:13 am
This follows two controversial previous decisions in Delfi v Estonia and MTE v Hungary. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 8:43 am
The last six weeks have seen some important or at least interesting decisions under the Fair Housing Act and Title III of the ADA. [read post]
11 May 2011, 7:42 am
In AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
10 Dec 2019, 11:10 am
New Relists City of Boise, Idaho v. [read post]
7 Mar 2007, 12:19 am
Therefore, for the reasons stated below, the Court applies the later-served rule in order to promote fairness and a uniform application of 1446(b). [read post]
