Search for: "State v. Parker"
Results 861 - 880
of 1,598
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jan 2021, 2:00 pm
As UPIC clinical reviewers of both Medicare and Medicaid claims are quick to state in hearings before an Administrative Law Judge, “If it isn’t documented, it didn’t happen. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 12:04 pm
The Supreme Court held in Price Waterhouse v. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 12:04 pm
The Supreme Court held in Price Waterhouse v. [read post]
9 Mar 2020, 10:26 am
CMS can revoke Medicare billing privileges if a provider or supplier is terminated, revoked or otherwise barred from participation in a State Medicaid program or any other Federal health care program. [read post]
25 Jan 2024, 5:31 am
Crude oil contains metals such as Cadmium (Cd), Lead (Pb), Manganese (Mn), Nickel (Ni), and Vanadium (V). [read post]
31 May 2012, 12:43 pm
Dukes involving the standard for class-action certification, and a fourth time in Parker v. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 8:25 pm
Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Sackett v. [read post]
29 Jun 2019, 3:12 pm
Penalty Provisions of Federal Gun Law Struck Down In the opening line of a June 24, 2019 ruling in United States v. [read post]
26 Nov 2007, 7:07 am
The case, Parker, et al., v. [read post]
13 Feb 2011, 7:56 pm
Parker 2011 U.S. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 12:05 pm
Kaestner Family Trust (April 16): Whether the Constitution’s due process clause bars a state from taxing a trust when beneficiaries of the trust are in-state residents United States v. [read post]
14 Oct 2022, 8:44 am
Doe v. [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 3:31 am
Parker. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 4:37 am
See Parker v. [read post]
6 Sep 2009, 6:00 am
Parker, 2009 U.S. [read post]
6 Apr 2021, 4:06 am
The case is entitled Parker et al. v. [read post]
8 Feb 2007, 5:06 am
[Miami Herald; see also Parker v. [read post]
17 Apr 2008, 3:40 am
Parker v. [read post]
9 Feb 2008, 4:11 pm
Not until I started talking with Rezneck -- as he walked towards the D.C. courthouse -- did I realize that he had argued the Parker v. [read post]
20 Nov 2007, 11:32 am
(The Court took no action on Tuesday on a conditional cross-petition, Parker, et al., v. [read post]
