Search for: "State v. Dollar" Results 9261 - 9280 of 9,610
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jan 2012, 2:00 am by Steve Lombardi
No. 09–0724 CEDAR RAPIDS COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT and EMC INSURANCE COMPANIES v. [read post]
3 Oct 2008, 5:01 am
Since the 1970's when the Supreme Court of the United States decided that lawyers could advertise (Bates v. [read post]
31 Mar 2009, 1:57 pm
  That approach was also affirmed by the current Supreme Court in the ITW v. [read post]
18 May 2025, 1:07 pm by Ilya Somin
If not for the unusually high deference to executive decisions on immigration policy wrongly granted by the Supreme Court in cases like Trump v. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 9:00 am by Jesse Tyner Moore
Watkins joins from the Office of the Arizona Attorney General, where he has overseen Arizona’s “regulatory sandbox” fintech initiative, the first of its kind in the United States. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 7:02 am by Kristian Soltes
The payments dollar value represents an increase of almost 13% over the first quarter 2019 and an increase of 56% over the year-earlier quarter. [read post]
8 Nov 2019, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Decisions about voter list maintenance, one of the most essential bureaucratic duties of state election officials, received intense scrutiny in several states this year. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 2:08 pm by UChicagoLaw
The AHIP publicly stated that they “continue to strongly support reform” but meanwhile were underwriting tens of millions of dollars of television ads attacking reform. [read post]
16 Mar 2013, 9:28 pm by Lyle Denniston
  A group of California vineyard operators will be represented in the case of Horne v. [read post]
30 Sep 2012, 4:30 pm
Probably half of all the cases we accept involve a client who has paid thousands of dollars to an attorney who has billed for work that was of questionable utility, or worse. [read post]
2 May 2023, 2:20 am by Kurt R. Karst
The new certification criterion is further laid out and explained in a special approval status rule for certain subsequent applicants at proposed FDC Act § 505(j)(5)(D)(v): (v) SPECIAL APPROVAL STATUS RULE FOR CERTAIN SUBSEQUENT APPLICANTS. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 4:34 pm by Howard Knopf
Such a tariff or equivalent mechanism would never get off the ground in the USA for many reasons, including that state sovereign immunity is well established by the U.S. [read post]