Search for: "State v. Minor" Results 1241 - 1260 of 16,394
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 May 2023, 12:30 am by David Pocklington
John the Evangelist Killingworth, supra, in which the Chancellor stated: “[53]. [read post]
1 May 2023, 4:36 am by Peter J. Sluka
§ 21-2,201) precluded the application of either a discount for lack of marketability (“DLOM”) or a minority discount (Bohac v Benes Serv. [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 11:23 am by Keith Szeliga
For services that are “of a type” offered and sold competitively in substantial quantities in the commercial marketplace, the contracting officer must determine that the offeror has submitted sufficient information to evaluate price reasonableness through price analysis.[38] For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, minor modifications to commercial products that do not change the commercial product to other than commercial are exempt from the requirement to submit certified cost or… [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 10:16 am by Eugene Volokh
Courts in the 1990s and early 2000s often used the Clause to invalidate some internet-related state statutes—especially ones that restricted "harmful to minors" material. [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 9:02 am by Ernie Svenson
The case ultimately ruled in Google’s favor, stating that the project was transformative and constituted fair use. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Existing democracies are fragile.[3] That includes the United States. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
" … The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit provides [under the James v. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 1:54 pm by Kevin LaCroix
[v] CFIUS is a US government interagency committee that reviews certain transactions involving foreign investment in the United States to determine their effect on national security. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 6:41 am by Samuel I. Portnoy
With the 30th anniversary of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) on the horizon, the Third Circuit’s recent precedential opinion in Scott v. [read post]