Search for: "District Court Nevada" Results 1301 - 1320 of 3,298
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Jan 2015, 12:00 am by Virginia Hunt
 Any party who loses at the district court level may file a further appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court within 30 days of the Notice of Entry of Judgment of the district court’s decision on the Petition. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 10:00 pm by Doug Austin
University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, Special Master Daniel B. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 9:38 am by Jim Rossi
In 2011, a federal district court in Nevada considering the consolidated cases entered summary judgment against Learject in most of these cases, reasoning that the state law claims are preempted by the NGA. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 12:00 am by Virginia Hunt
If an appeal is necessary, it is heard administratively in an informal manner with no courts or judges involved. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 5:00 am by Ron Coleman
So you can’t — and besides, if you’d gone to a district court, and even this Court of Appeals, you’d think you’d have something going for you; right? [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 2:03 am by Gregorgy Dell
In a recent ruling from the United States District Court District of Nevada, a Judge ruled that CIGNA/LINA was wrong in denying continued Long Term Disability Benefits to Kimberly Brown. [read post]
21 Dec 2014, 4:17 am by @travelblawg
Ratzlaf dealt himself a bad hand: On the evening of October 20, 1988, defendant-petitioner Waldemar Ratzlaf ran up a debt of $160,000 playing blackjack at the High Sierra Casino in Reno, Nevada. [read post]
20 Dec 2014, 4:33 pm by Patricia Salkin
California-Nevada Annual Conference of the Methodist Church v City and County of San Francisco, 2014 WL 6665915 (ND Ca. 11/24/2014) The opinion can be accessed at: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/california/candce/4:2011cv02338/240674/168/0.pdf? [read post]
20 Dec 2014, 4:33 pm by Patricia Salkin
California-Nevada Annual Conference of the Methodist Church v City and County of San Francisco, 2014 WL 6665915 (ND Ca. 11/24/2014) The opinion can be accessed at: https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/california/candce/4:2011cv02338/240674/168/0.pdf? [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 7:08 am by John Elwood
The district court invalidated the rule, but the D.C. [read post]
The District Court of Nevada dismissed the action, holding that the screening was not an “integral and indispensable part of the principal activities they were employed to perform. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 10:29 pm by Lisa Milam-Perez
The district court held the post-shift screenings were not integral and indispensable to the workers’ principal activities, and thus they were noncompensable postliminary activities. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 10:14 am by Michael Kun
The United States District Court in Nevada dismissed the lawsuit, holding that the time spent in screenings was postliminary, noncompensable time as it was not integral and indispensable to the employees’ principal activities. [read post]
The United States District Court in Nevada dismissed the lawsuit, holding that the time spent in screenings was postliminary, noncompensable time as it was not integral and indispensable to the employees’ principal activities. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 10:06 am by Greg Mersol
Interestingly, the district court dismissed the case without discovery under Rule 12(b)(6), finding that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 10:29 am by Jason Weiner
If a Nevada courts denies bail it is called a “no bail fold. [read post]