Search for: "Price v. United States" Results 801 - 820 of 5,814
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Mar 2023, 1:30 pm by Will Baude
The United States Supreme Court reviewed that state decision and reversed, holding that the state's interpretation of its own procedural requirement was not an "adequate and independent state ground" (AISG) for the judgment. [read post]
2 Nov 2021, 9:43 am by Cinthia Macie
The increasing consolidation has attracted scrutiny from the United States Department of Justice since 2019 (many have critiqued the DOJ’s involvement as animus from then Attorney General William Barr). [read post]
30 Mar 2022, 7:40 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Kapadia Introduction On March 24, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) issued a much-anticipated decision in Patel, et al. v. 7-Eleven, Inc., et al. answering a certified question from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concerning the application of the Massachusetts independent contractor law (“ICL”) to franchise relationships. [read post]
30 Mar 2022, 7:40 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Kapadia Introduction On March 24, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) issued a much-anticipated decision in Patel, et al. v. 7-Eleven, Inc., et al. answering a certified question from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concerning the application of the Massachusetts independent contractor law (“ICL”) to franchise relationships. [read post]
23 Jun 2020, 4:00 am by Judith Gaskell
Price Waterhouse v. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
  The article begins with a quote from United States Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
  The article begins with a quote from United States Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. [read post]
27 Mar 2007, 6:40 am
The third case in the trilogy of securities antitrust immunity, United States v. [read post]
27 May 2021, 8:57 am by jeffreynewmanadmin
The United States alleged that Navistar knowingly created fraudulent commercial sales invoices and submitted them to the government to justify the company’s prices. [read post]
Rowe, 552 U.S. at 371 (“pre-emption occurs at least where state laws have a ‘significant impact’—specifically on prices, routes, or services”). [read post]