Search for: "Price v. State ex rel. Price"
Results 61 - 80
of 367
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Aug 2012, 10:06 am
In United States ex rel. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 3:00 am
Miss. ex rel. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 2:52 pm
 In Schuster v. [read post]
4 Jan 2013, 3:38 am
Buckwalter of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in U.S. ex rel. [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 2:53 pm
Just before his ouster, Danon filed a whistleblower action, State of New York ex rel David Danon v. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 11:56 am
In United States ex rel. [read post]
25 Oct 2016, 7:18 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 10:55 am
In U.S. ex rel Adventist Health Sys., et al. v. [read post]
19 Sep 2007, 9:54 pm
Rel. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 12:00 am
See British Airways v Commission. [read post]
15 Aug 2008, 6:13 pm
The case is significant in that, for now, despite the long-standing rule to the contrary in the seminal United States Supreme Court case of Hanover Shoe v. [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 6:13 pm
The case is significant in that, for now, despite the long-standing rule to the contrary in the seminal United States Supreme Court case of Hanover Shoe v. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 9:46 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
31 May 2023, 7:56 am
The qui tam case is captioned U.S. ex rel. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 10:56 am
United States ex rel. [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 6:26 am
Affirming a state appellate court’s decision overturning the trial court’s grant of judgment on the pleadings to the trucking company, the state high court left it to the trial court to determine whether the company in fact misclassified its drivers (People ex rel Harris v Pan Anchor Transportation, Inc, July 28, 2014, Chin, M). [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 2:29 am
Most states classify trade secrets and customer contacts as protectable interests, and Missouri is no exception.The recent Missouri appellate decision Brown v. [read post]
6 Feb 2007, 8:00 am
., the Supreme Court of Hawaii will hear oral arguments in County of Kauai ex rel. [read post]
31 Jan 2020, 7:54 am
In Qualcomm v. [read post]
19 Feb 2012, 6:57 pm
The Blog of Legal Times recently featured an interesting case where a District Court Judge refused after the trial of a False Claims Act ("FCA") case to impose the minimum $50.2 million Civil False Claims Act penalty on the grounds that the penalty was unconstitutionally excessive in violation of the 8th Amendment: United States ex rel Kurt Bunk & Daniel Heuser v. [read post]
