Search for: "Murphy v. State"
Results 1021 - 1040
of 2,101
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Nov 2014, 9:55 pm
(See Luzano v. [read post]
22 Jun 2021, 4:08 am
§ 424a(d) explicitly states that a triennial redetermination is not applicable in reverse offset states.Because the NJ Legislature did not include a cost-of-living increase in the statute, and the federal statute exempts reverse offset states from reviewing its benefits triennially, we affirm the order denying a redetermination of benefits and for the reimbursement of overpayment of benefits.Wilhelm v. [read post]
21 Apr 2008, 7:07 am
Circuit Court in sequential rulings, was Murphy v. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 12:38 am
Murphy v. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 2:24 pm
Horton and in Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 3:47 am
In 2017 the 10th Circuit held in Murphy v. [read post]
2 May 2023, 2:32 pm
In Fox v. [read post]
11 Jun 2008, 11:05 am
Case Name: Hannifan v. [read post]
16 Apr 2014, 8:43 am
EEOC v. [read post]
10 Oct 2011, 9:12 am
"We agree with the state that the prisoners can do no more than speculate on this point," Murphy wrote. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 1:03 pm
Thus, in the 1963 case Brady v. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 12:56 am
Ontiveros v. [read post]
6 Jul 2016, 10:00 pm
The majority on the 8th Circuit panel cited and agreed with a 3rd Circuit ruling — U.S. v. [read post]
2 May 2007, 7:01 am
In the recent landmark US Supreme Court case, Massachusetts v. [read post]
20 Oct 2009, 3:19 pm
Murphy Oil USA, No. 07-60756 (5th Cir. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 9:40 am
The Los Angeles Times reports this morning:The California Supreme Court handed workers a major victory Monday, in effect tripling the back pay they can seek if they are forced to work through meal and rest breaks required by state law. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 11:06 am
By April Rolen-Ogden In Comer v. [read post]
26 Nov 2024, 10:34 am
See the case of Murphy-Hylton v. [read post]
29 May 2008, 5:55 pm
Murphy Middle District of Tennessee at Columbia 08a0276n.06 Woods v. [read post]
10 Mar 2010, 3:51 am
Specht v. [read post]
