Search for: "Fee v. United States"
Results 901 - 920
of 6,842
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Apr 2010, 10:26 am
Quon v. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 9:37 am
The first permits judicial review by direct appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 7:43 am
V. [read post]
21 Mar 2013, 5:00 am
United States Bank, N.A., 479 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2007) (discussed in this blog post). [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 4:12 pm
Martinez v. [read post]
24 Aug 2020, 7:09 am
In McGirt v. [read post]
14 Jun 2010, 7:28 am
United States No. 08-1322, Astrue v. [read post]
27 Feb 2021, 11:30 am
Ga)) and the United States Trustee and perhaps the National Association of Bankruptcy Trustees are expected to appear. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 6:50 am
Additionally, the United States has filed an amicus brief supporting petitioners that specifically casts doubt on the ability of the market to regulate fees. [read post]
10 Aug 2007, 6:42 am
United States v. [read post]
2 May 2024, 10:39 am
Hamas is unable by law to retain public relations services in the United States, but if it could, these services would be prohibitively expensive. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 8:35 pm
(Subscription required.)BackgroundFiled by Newman Ferrara back in May of 2016 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, the lawsuit, entitled Lennen v. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 6:37 am
Therefore, ASCAP applied to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for the determination of a reasonable fee. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 8:02 pm
“This extension will permit us to conduct a careful review of the right to bring action under Title III in light of the national interests of the United States and efforts to expedite a transition to democracy in Cuba,” the State Department said. [read post]
7 May 2007, 10:10 am
United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. [read post]
9 Feb 2009, 11:26 am
” Such existing law refers to the “legal standards generally applicable to development fees” including the “reasonable relationship” requirement as stated in the Mitigation Fee Act (at Government Code section 66001(b)), and as described by the Supreme Court in San Remo Hotel v. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 8:31 am
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in American Express Corp. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 6:45 am
Colorado – the United States Supreme Court issued an important opinion impacting individuals who have had their criminal convictions invalidated. [read post]
12 Sep 2017, 7:46 am
United State District Judge Thomas W. [read post]
26 Apr 2012, 3:37 pm
A unit of state government is immune from suit and liability unless the state consents. [read post]