Search for: "Deem v. State" Results 61 - 80 of 15,550
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 May 2024, 12:11 pm
” https://fedsoc.org/events/consumers-research-v-fcc-and-the-legality-of-the-universal-service-fund-contribution-regime. [read post]
14 May 2024, 12:11 pm
” https://fedsoc.org/events/consumers-research-v-fcc-and-the-legality-of-the-universal-service-fund-contribution-regime. [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" The issue raised on appeal is whether Supreme Court properly struck respondent's unverified answer (see Matter of Atwood v Pridgen, 142 AD3d 1278, 1279 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 945 [2016]).Petitioners failed to reject respondent's answer and deem it a nullity based upon the lack of a verification (see CPLR 3022). [read post]
14 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" The issue raised on appeal is whether Supreme Court properly struck respondent's unverified answer (see Matter of Atwood v Pridgen, 142 AD3d 1278, 1279 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 945 [2016]).Petitioners failed to reject respondent's answer and deem it a nullity based upon the lack of a verification (see CPLR 3022). [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Following a request for additional studies and supporting materials, the APA deemed each permit application complete on March 3, 2022, complied with its notice obligations, and further advised that public comments would be accepted through March 31, 2022. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Following a request for additional studies and supporting materials, the APA deemed each permit application complete on March 3, 2022, complied with its notice obligations, and further advised that public comments would be accepted through March 31, 2022. [read post]
9 May 2024, 5:55 am by Mutasim Ali
Second, based on the first conclusion, and as established by the ICJ in Bosnia v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm by Evan Brown
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
7 May 2024, 1:11 pm by Evan Brown
This flawed scope suggests no direct link between the law’s restrictions and the stated security concerns, weakening its justification under strict scrutiny. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:31 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
This is recognized in the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) at 9 FAM § 402.1-3 , which states that an “applicant desiring to come to the United States for one principal purpose, and one or more incidental purposes, must be classified in accordance with the principal purpose. [read post]