Search for: "S. v. Social Security Administration" Results 901 - 920 of 3,467
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Feb 2018, 1:38 pm by William Ford
Eliot Kim summarized the Second Circuit’s ruling in Linde v. [read post]
19 Apr 2018, 11:00 am by William Ford
Mattis, the Supreme Court’s per curiam opinion in U.S. v. [read post]
4 Jun 2021, 12:30 pm by John Ross
[A Social Security screw-up, prolonged detentions, and greasing the wheels of justice.] [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 11:32 am by Tia Sewell
Jeremy Gordon summarized the oral argument in the Supreme Court’s Hungary v. [read post]
3 Dec 2022, 7:08 am
  Their political background, social condition, culture and the availability of alternative legislations to deal with seditious situations to safeguard their national security are different to those in HKSAR. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 3:54 am by Edith Roberts
New York, a challenge to the Trump administrations decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census. [read post]
28 Oct 2016, 1:45 pm by Eugene Volokh
Unsurprisingly, this conflicts with the Supreme Court’s precedents (such as City of Ladue v. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 3:20 pm by Unknown
H.R.2128: To amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to clarify the authority of tribal governments in regard to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 3:20 pm by Native American Rights Fund
H.R.2128: To amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to clarify the authority of tribal governments in regard to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. [read post]
20 Feb 2018, 10:11 am by William Ford
Vance Spath placed the United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2011, 4:43 am by Mandelman
  So, plotting data on a ‘V” shaped model but having it turn out to be a different letter of  the alphabet, is a like drawing the route New Jersey on a map of Australia. [read post]
7 Sep 2021, 7:25 am by Public Employment Law Press
Citing Matter of Kenny v DiNapoli, 11 NY3d 873, the Appellate Division observed that "[f]or purposes of the Retirement and Social Security Law, an accident is defined as "a sudden, fortuitous mischance, unexpected, out of the ordinary, and injurious in impact" and "an injury that results from the performance of ordinary employment duties and is a risk inherent in such job duties is not considered accidental. [read post]