Search for: "FR v. State"
Results 101 - 120
of 354
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Apr 2024, 3:52 pm
Schmid and V. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 4:41 pm
Also includes articles on Native American law in the Supreme CourtBoldt Decision — United States v. [read post]
21 Feb 2023, 9:46 am
[9] 87 FR 23453 (April 20, 2022). [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 6:57 am
Canada (not to be confused with R. v. [read post]
7 Sep 2021, 6:17 am
The ban was called the “Feres Doctrine,” referencing the Supreme Court of the United States decision in Feres v. [read post]
2 Jan 2009, 4:57 am
See 69 FR 468 (Jan. 5, 2004); 69 FR 53318 (Aug. 31, 2004); 71 FR 42605 (July 27, 2006); 73 FR 22065 (Apr. 24, 2008). [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 6:40 am
In Meacham v. [read post]
12 Jul 2024, 3:30 am
– Ohio v. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 12:00 am
Supreme Beef Processors, Inc. v. [read post]
1 May 2013, 7:11 am
Similar in structure but lacking the key change is the same team's Twenty Four Hours from Tulsa", popularised by Gene Pitney but which gender- and location-specific lyrics that made it less suitable for endless cover versions (though this Kat is sure that Swedish singer Östen Warnerbring's "15 minuter från Eslöv" was wonderful). [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 4:20 am
Cybersecurity Risk Management, Strategy, Governance, and Incident Disclosure, Release Nos. 33-11216; 34-97989 (July 26, 2023) [88 FR 51896, 51917 (Aug. 4, 2023)] (quoting Matrixx Initiatives v. [read post]
24 Sep 2020, 1:51 pm
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in State of New York, et al. v. [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 8:40 pm
Marshall. http://t.co/Jht3buj B-MD: Whether debtor is a "business trust" per §101(9)(A)(v) is a federal question independent of state law rules. http://t.co/BD1KjrL B-MD: Debtor is "business trust" per §101(9)(A)(v) if "primary purpose" is to carry on business & not to preserve res. http://t.co/BD1KjrL B-NJ: §506(b) applies only to postpet. int/fees/costs; prepet. penalties/int/fees/costs governed by… [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 4:04 pm
In Thaler v. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 1:56 pm
See 86 FR 41889. [read post]
20 Jan 2019, 11:43 pm
See United States v. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 8:10 am
I'm on the run today, so I likely won't have time to discuss this in detail; but you can read the opinions here (McAdams v. [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 6:00 am
Gisvold v. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 5:55 am
This may be relevant in jurisdictions where state or local governments or employers continue to impose vaccine mandates on healthcare providers, staff or suppliers. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 1:02 pm
[i] 80 FR 37053. [read post]
