Search for: "State v. Dakota" Results 1601 - 1620 of 2,221
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jun 2009, 7:09 pm
For seven states (Hawaii, Maine, Minnesota, North Dakota, Oregon, Vermont, and Wisconsin), the rate of reporting was greater than three times the median. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 2:17 pm by John Elwood
In an age when members of the public can no longer bestir themselves to leave their vaguely couch-shaped objects to purchase needful items in person, South Dakota v. [read post]
7 Jun 2020, 1:17 am by Schachtman
Requirements Imposed By State Licensing Boards and Medical Professional Societies The involvement of medical professionals in disciplining physicians for dubious litigation testimony, whether through state licensing authorities or voluntary medical associations, raises some difficult questions: Does a physician’s rendering an opinion on a medical issue in litigation, such as diagnosing silicosis, asbestosis, welding-induced encephalopathy, or fenfluramine-related cardiac… [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 3:26 pm by slkimbro
Idaho New Mexico Colorado Vermont Washington Texas North Carolina Missouri Wisconsin Maine North Dakota Michigan Tennessee Oregon Montana South Carolina Utah New Jersey Resolution of the ethics matter was an important development in the states’ interpretation of online marketing. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 8:57 pm by Melissa Tatum
"In February 2008, Edmondson joined several other state attorneys general (Idaho, Alaska, Florida, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin) on an amicus brief asking the U.S. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 4:49 pm by Tom Smith
This means that small states such as Wyoming, Vermont and North Dakota are overrepresented in the House — and other states are underrepresented. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 3:58 am by Edith Roberts
The justices held 5-4 in United States v. [read post]
24 May 2007, 10:40 am
"Well, state court judges are savvy and powerful people. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 9:22 am by Christa Culver
Army Corps of EngineersDocket: 10-1059Issue(s): The court of appeals held in this case that land transfers by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to the State of South Dakota pursuant to the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 did not violate §§ 605(b)(3) and (c)(1)(B) of that Act because they did not include lands within the “external boundaries” of the Yankton Sioux Reservation. [read post]
14 May 2012, 10:16 am by Medicare Set Aside Services
Take for example a case recently reported out of South Dakota in which Medicare is seeking $110,864 reimbursement out of a $621,000 med mal settlement. [read post]