Search for: "MILLER v. MILLER" Results 1321 - 1340 of 7,352
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Dec 2021, 3:16 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  Moncho v Miller  2021 NY Slip Op 06960 Decided on December 14, 2021, Appellate Division, First Department makes this point. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 2:49 am by Amy Howe
Louisiana, in which the Court will consider (among other things) whether its 2012 decision in Miller v. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 8:50 am by Matt C. Bailey
Miller of the Southern District of California entered an interesting order in response to the plaintiff’s request to relinquish supplemental jurisdiction over state law wage claims in Weltman v. [read post]
10 Nov 2021, 2:52 pm by Eugene Volokh
From Judge Wallace Tashima's opinion (joined by Judges Milan Smith and Jacqueline Nguyen) in Miller v. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 3:00 am by Ted Folkman
Today’s case of the day, Kriegman v. [read post]
19 Aug 2016, 7:38 am by Amy Howe
Briefly: At the Fed Soc Blog, Brian Miller argues that, although Friedrichs v. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 12:04 pm by Erica Goldberg
(I fear the Supreme Court may decide something to this effect in Florida v. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 4:22 am
Employee suspended without pay in excess of the time authorized by §75 may be entitled to be paid for some or all of such suspension without payElizabeth Miller Nabors v Town of Somers, 2010 NY Slip Op 03089, Decided on April 13, 2010, Appellate Division, Second DepartmentElizabeth Miller Nabors began working part time for the Town of Somers. [read post]
14 May 2015, 11:40 am by Mary Zambreno
The Iowa Supreme Court first addressed the viability of the alienation of affection tort in Bearbower v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 5:29 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Labor Department files suit to restore losses to the Miller’s Health Systems Employee Stock Ownership Plan Bank or other plan trustees and fiduciaries of Employee Stock Ownership Plans or other employee benefit plans holding company stock, sponsoring employers and their management should heed the new Perez v. [read post]