Search for: "State v. Losee" Results 8501 - 8520 of 14,488
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Dec 2007, 7:15 am
Managed care programs in Nevada are losing medical providers because of slow reimbursements so, despite "speeded up" approvals, families cannot find providers close-by. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 8:23 am by Graeme Hall
Secretary of State for the Home Department v CD [2011] EWHC 2087 (Admin) (29 July 2011): Control order ruled lawful: “reasonable grounds for suspecting CD is a leading figure in network of Islamist extremists” – see guardian.co.uk SCHALK AND KOPF v. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 7:17 am by Ruth Bonino
Changes expected but no implementation date as yet Financial penalties for employers who lose at Tribunal – Employment Judges will soon be given discretion to levy a financial penalty, payable to the State, against such employers for breach of employment rights. [read post]
16 Mar 2007, 7:45 am
In preparing a more detailed paper on errors in Innovation and Its Discontents (Jaffe and Lerner, Princeton University Press, 2004), I revisited the brief of eBay in the eBay v. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 8:16 am by law shucks
The article is entitled “Company Loses $271 Million Claim Over Wireless Patents. [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 5:36 pm
Some of the critics thought that we were either ignorant or intentionally playing dumb about whether drug companies could be "state actors" for constitutional purposes. [read post]
2 Jan 2011, 4:04 pm by Marie Louise
 Bedding Holdings v INEC & Others (IPKat) Scotland Use it or lose it? [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 2:04 pm by vforberger
Last week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued its decision in Catholic Charities v. [read post]
11 Aug 2010, 6:04 am by SHG
Radley Balko interviewed Joseph Cassilly, Harford County, Maryland state’s attorney, for his article at Reason about the handful of states that contend that it's a crime to record police in the performance of their duty. [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 6:07 am by Aaron Tang
I really do hope that the Court doesn’t edge back towards Ohio v. [read post]