Search for: "American Federation of Government Employees v. United States" Results 1541 - 1560 of 1,887
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2011, 7:57 am by Kara OBrien
  In the criminal context, DPAs typically involve the government filing a formal charging document, usually an information, as well as the DPA with the appropriate court; NPAs typically do not involve the courts and the agreements are maintained by the parties.[9] Historically, the SEC resolved settled enforcement actions by filing consent judgments based on civil complaints in a United States District Court or an administrative order instituting proceedings and… [read post]
21 May 2011, 10:45 pm
See also United States v. [read post]
20 May 2011, 12:34 pm by Jonathan Zasloff
s, Daimler executives in Argentina assisted the military government in murdering the company’s employees who protested government repression. [read post]
17 May 2011, 4:45 pm
 Responsibility for all Medicare reimbursements in States that create SIMABs and receive block grants is transferred from the federal government to the State. [read post]
16 May 2011, 8:08 pm by The Legal Blog
In fact the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, 1998 was designed to restrict their use for employee screening. [read post]
16 May 2011, 10:24 am by Lyle Denniston
Florida (10-1139), raising the issue of whether a state government interferes with foreign policy by barring state college professors from using any funds to visit Cuba or any other “terrorist state”; and Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela, et al., v. [read post]
10 May 2011, 4:43 pm by Christa Culver
Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, against individual employees of private companies that contract with the federal government to provide prison services, when the plaintiff has adequate alternative remedies for the harm alleged and the defendants have no employment or contractual relationship with the government.Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (9th Circuit)Petition for certiorariBrief in oppositionPetitioners' replyAmicus brief… [read post]
8 May 2011, 11:58 am by Law Lady
The panel overturned an arbitrator's decision that the hospital must honor its past practice of allowing employees to smoke in a designated spot on the property.The dispute began in January 2009 when Armstrong County Memorial Hospital adopted a policy that banned smoking anywhere on hospital property.Dunn v. [read post]
6 May 2011, 3:46 pm by Jon L. Gelman
” Although the Sherman Anti-trust Act had been passed in 1890, the United States Supreme Court decision of U.S. v. [read post]
2 May 2011, 5:29 am by Badrinath Srinivasan
The Status of Religious Arbitration in the United States and Canada Nicholas Walter Abstract: This paper discusses, and challenges, the status of religious arbitration in the United States and Canada. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 2:13 pm by Lyle Denniston
”  For that part of its ruling, the state court majority relied in part upon a comment the Supreme Court had made in its controversial campaign finance decision last year in Citizens United v. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 4:19 am by Marie Louise
(Docket Report) District Court E D Washington: False marking claim defeated at summary judgment – Employee mistakes do not constitute false marking: Bow Jax Inc. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2011, 9:48 am by Susan Brenner
As Wikipedia notes, until the “1960s, mens rea in the United States was a very slippery, vague, and confused concept” because it was based on common law. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 9:07 am by Aidan O'Neill QC, Matrix.
The Ministerial exception in US case law On 28 March 2011 the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Perich v. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 8:05 am by JB
United States, the Supreme Court Justices agreed that the government could not halt the publication of the Pentagon Papers. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 8:30 am by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
Federal Election Commission ruling spoiled the American political landscape.Public Citizen predicted the devastating impact of the decision even before it was handed down. [read post]