Search for: "***u. S. v. Little" Results 1081 - 1100 of 1,723
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Dec 2013, 9:01 pm by Anita Ramasastry
The answer is: It depends, and in many cases, there will be little or no financial loss to the consumer. [read post]
8 Dec 2013, 5:30 am by Barry Sookman
http://t.co/XMMpMQomkl -> John Degen: The book stops here http://t.co/5Ps2TRgmWY -> It’s Illegal For Offline Retailers To Collect Email Addresses–Capp v. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 8:46 am by Ann Caresani
Supreme Court decides to take this case, it could reject the DOL’s arguments on the same basis that it rejected the DOL’s arguments in CIGNA v. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 3:28 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
An excerpt: In the Counties’ brief in support of the petition for certiorari, they claim that a holding in the Tribe’s favor on the disestablishment question would contravene the “justifiable expectations” of non-Indians in the area, who have come to expect to be exposed to little if any tribal presence or power. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 10:28 am by Ann Tweedy
Tweedy, “Unjustifiable Expectations:  Laying to Rest Allotment-Era Settlers,” 36 Seattle U. [read post]
21 Nov 2013, 12:13 pm
  The FDA’s brief cited Sigma-Tau Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Oct 2013, 6:31 am
Even more seriously, there is a positive expense involved in incarcerating an individual, who will generate little if any revenue in prison but could continue to contribute to social wealth by paying a high fine and continuing to be employed. [read post]