Search for: "Advance Services, Inc." Results 81 - 100 of 4,831
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Feb 2024, 6:07 pm by Mark Ashton
As this writer read the amicus brief of a group called Advancing American Freedom, Inc. in support of the Petitioner parents, there is certainly a hearty supply of apple pie in the text. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 4:27 am by Allan Blutstein
Federal courts issue hundreds of decisions in FOIA cases every year. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 4:04 am by Peter J. Sluka
Services, Inc. v Jupiter Partners, L.P., 309 AD2d 288, 300 [1st Dept 2003]). [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 2:35 pm by Marty Lederman
  The ballot restrictions there were permissible because they “served the state interest in protecting the integrity and regularity of the election process, an interest independent of any attempt to evade the constitutional prohibition against the imposition of additional qualifications for service in Congress. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 2:02 pm by Marty Lederman
  The ballot restrictions there were permissible because they “served the state interest in protecting the integrity and regularity of the election process, an interest independent of any attempt to evade the constitutional prohibition against the imposition of additional qualifications for service in Congress. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 9:57 am by Stephanie Ricker
Hill-Rom Holdings, Inc., Hill-Rom Company, Inc., Hill-Rom Services, Inc., and Advanced Respiratory Inc. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 1:11 pm by Kailey Monsivais
Attorney for the District of South Carolina announced that Durable Medical Equipment (DME) companies Hill-Rom Holdings, Inc., Hill-Rom Company, Inc., Hill-Rom Services, Inc., and Advanced Respiratory Inc. [read post]
31 Jan 2024, 7:07 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
Mehta and Kaitlyn Box have thoughts: "The Supreme Court on January 17, 2024 heard arguments in two cases – R elentless, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:02 pm by renholding
I dissent from the Commission’s denial of a petition to amend Rule 202.5(e), our so-called gag rule.[1]  This de facto rule follows from the Commission’s enforcement of its policy, adopted in 1972, that it will not “permit a defendant or respondent to consent to a judgment or order that imposes a sanction while denying the allegations in the complaint or order for proceedings. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 4:00 am by Marc Bhalla
Ethan Jerry Mings is a facilitator mediator and President of The Desk Consulting Group Inc. [read post]
26 Jan 2024, 10:03 am
Today's advance release foreclosure law opinion: Homebridge Financial Services, Inc. v. [read post]