Search for: "STATE EX REL. v. Court of Appeals" Results 1261 - 1280 of 2,056
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Sep 2009, 10:33 am
At the DIDA site, under Document Sources, you can read about some of those drug company lawsuits, in particular: United States of America ex rel. [read post]
18 May 2019, 9:27 am by MOTP
The jury determined reasonable attorney's fees for both UTSW and Rohrmoos at $800,000 for representation in the trial court, $150,000 in the court of appeals, and $75,000 for representation in this Court.The trial court entered final judgment against Rohrmoos, stating:1. [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 7:08 am by Greg Jacobs
In a case of first impression in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the court held in United States ex rel. [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 12:34 pm by John Ross
This term, the Court will hear argument from IJ's educational choice team in Espinoza v. [read post]
13 May 2010, 3:26 am by David Smith
The intent and purpose of the 1999 Order was set out effectively in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another, Ex Parte Spath Holme Limited which was referred to in the instant case. [read post]
13 May 2010, 3:26 am by David Smith
The intent and purpose of the 1999 Order was set out effectively in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and Another, Ex Parte Spath Holme Limited which was referred to in the instant case. [read post]
21 Feb 2018, 7:45 pm by Scott McKeown
  Ex parte McAward, Appeal 2015-006416 (PTAB Aug. 25, 2017) (Section I. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 12:35 pm by Kevin Russell and Charles Davis
Upton); ex post facto clause challenges ( Trotter v. [read post]
5 Apr 2015, 3:52 pm by Stephen Bilkis
The County Court is a court of limited jurisdiction and may act only as provided by the New York Constitution or by act of the Legislature within the limitations of the Constitution (see NY Const, art VI, § 11; Judiciary Law § 190; Matter of Russell v Clute, 222 AD2d 980 [3d Dept 1995]; People ex rel. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 6:15 pm by Scott A. McKeown
Denied SNQs raise the fear of potential district court estoppel relative to the prior art underlying the denied SNQ. [read post]