Search for: "STAND et al. v. STATE."
Results 161 - 180
of 2,171
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Sep 2016, 7:00 am
The plaintiffs In Galaria et al. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2016, 11:38 am
Moench, et al. v. [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 6:20 am
Ct. 945 (2012), and United States v. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 1:06 pm
Employees of a state or a political subdivision of a state may not be required to pay an agency-shop fee to a union unless the employee affirmatively consents to pay such a feeJanus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 85 U. [read post]
29 Sep 2014, 6:37 am
White Hat Management, LLC, et. al., 2013-2050. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 3:00 pm
EMI Resorts, Inc Et Al [read post]
25 Apr 2008, 7:25 am
Transocean Offshore USA, Inc., et al., No. 05-300963, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed its long standing decision that a watercraft under construction is not a “vessel in navigation” for purposes of the Jones Act. [read post]
6 Sep 2011, 2:04 pm
Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Chicago, et al. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 1:00 pm
Carter, et. al., United States of America v. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 3:18 pm
State of Louisiana etc. et al. v. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 5:43 am
Mohammed et al. [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 10:18 pm
In Cancer Voices et al. v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 2:00 am
The case is Associations Des Eleveurs De Canards et D'Oies Du Quebec, et al., v. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 6:03 pm
For those of you who recognized that the Ninth Circuit got it 100% right when it found in Morris v. [read post]
12 Nov 2009, 9:10 am
Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. [read post]
23 May 2009, 1:12 pm
Dubroff, et al. v. [read post]
19 Nov 2012, 2:44 pm
The question before the Court is a seemingly simple one: do the plaintiffs (Amnesty International et al.) possess standing to challenge FISA in the first place? [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 10:35 am
See, e.g., Jerry Kang, et al., Implicit Bias in the Courtroom, Jerry Kang et al., 9 UCLA L. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 7:39 am
In a major win for the USGBC, Judge Sands dismissed Gifford, et al's Federal claims with prejudice, which means they cannot be brought again, Because the Federal claims were dismissed, the Judge also dismissed Gifford, et al's state claims for lack of jurisdiction. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 6:41 am
Doreen Edwards et al. v. [read post]
