Search for: "Cost v. Cost" Results 9461 - 9480 of 48,946
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jun 2022, 9:04 pm by Public Employment Law Press
  Order, Court of Claims of the State of New York (Jeanette Rodriguez-Morick, J.), entered August 3, 2021, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 3:36 pm by Marty Lederman
”  As I explained in an earlier post, Congress intended RFRA to incorporate by reference the Supreme Court’s Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence from the era preceding Employment Division v. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 4:03 pm
  So if plaintiff obtains a judgment for, say, $300,000, she only gets 998 costs after the second offer, even though this judgment is greater than the first offer as well. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:21 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The Supreme Court, by a majority of 4 to 1, upheld the costs assessment of the costs officers. [read post]
11 Apr 2017, 3:37 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Even if upholding the costs orders would infringe art 10 rights, the fundamental principle that citizens were entitled to assume that the law would not change retroactively would be directly infringed by the order sought. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 8:00 am by J Robert Brown Jr.
  Putative acquirors must now be prepared to pay all of the costs associated with making an acquisition (lining up the financing, paying the advisors, devoting management time to the matter), then pay the costs of a proxy contest to win one-third of the board. [read post]
16 Apr 2014, 5:30 am by Renee Kolar
 Online Dispute Resolution: An Amorphous Concept, Yet An Effective Tool Part V  Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV By: Burkley Wombwell V. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 11:03 am by Brian A. Hall
UnIP (UnIntellectual Property): Trade Secrets for Certain Financial Information and Tax Structure The highly followed patent litigation, Apple v. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 1:28 pm by WIMS
Plaintiffs appealed from a judgment in favor of defendant entered after a bench trial at which the district court determined that UGI was not an operator of nine of the MGPs under the standard set forth in United States v. [read post]