Search for: "Blue v. Blue" Results 61 - 80 of 5,797
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Aug 2022, 10:04 am by Dan Flynn
” The federal criminal case of the United States v Paul Kruse went to the jury by midweek after evidence was closed and submitted to the jury. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 12:34 pm
Blue Cross also makes the argument that, independent of the state action doctrine, the principles of abstention, set forth in Burford v. [read post]
23 Jul 2010, 3:38 am by Dan Frith
I am happy to report that Virginia's refusal to "blue pencil" noncompete agreements was again recently affirmed by a federal court in Alexandria in the July 15, 2010 decision in BP Products v. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 9:00 pm by Adjunct LawProfs
Diesel v Town of Lewisboro, CA2, 232 F.3d 92 While some might allege that there is a "blue wall of silence"* encouraged by certain individuals involved in law enforcement, rarely does one find a court decision that specifically addresses the... [read post]
20 Feb 2023, 9:04 pm by Dan Flynn
The Austin-based federal Western District Court for Texas found the United States v. [read post]
7 Jul 2020, 4:08 pm by Kantor & Kantor LLP
If you are a member of this class you may submit or resubmit to Blue Shield any claims you may have for reimbursement for residential treatment that you received while a Blue Shield member between September 2, 2007 and December 31, 2015 for anorexia nervosa or bulimia nervosa if Blue Shield denied authorization or reimbursement on the grounds that your plan did not provide coverage for residential treatment. [read post]
17 May 2010, 2:19 am by sally
Mobilx Ltd ( in administration) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners; Blue Sphere Global Ltd v Same; Calltel Telecom Ltd and another v Same [2010] EWCA Civ 517; [2010] WLR (D) 124 “Where a trader had means of knowing that by his purchase he was participating in a transaction connected with fraudulent evasion of VAT he lost his right to deduct input tax but only when he knew or should have known that the transaction was connected to fraud. [read post]