Search for: "State v. Words" Results 1801 - 1820 of 36,210
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Apr 2008, 10:55 am
In a decision issued on March 13, 2008, the Delaware Chancery Court in JANA Master Fund, Ltd. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 12:02 pm by Gabe Acevedo
Two things sent the legal technology industry into a frenzy.First, the Victor Stanley v. [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 12:21 pm by Zack Bluestone
According to Ashley Townshend of the Asia Sentinel, most observers expect the Permanent Court of Arbitration to find that it has jurisdiction to hear the Republic of Philippines v. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 9:02 pm
The state of Louisiana included the candidates' statements in its latest filing seeking rehearing of Kennedy v. [read post]
22 Jun 2021, 2:33 pm
of the opinion:"A variation on this view culminated in Brandenburg v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am by Marty Lederman
”   Some amici, such as Professor Kurt Lash, have filed briefs arguing that the presidency is not a “disqualified” office covered by the Positions Clause—in other words, that Section 3 permits someone to serve as President (or Vice-President) even if they are a covered person who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States (indeed, even if they’ve “given aid or comfort” to… [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 3:30 am by William Funk
Seminole Rock & Sand Co., in which it stated without citation to precedent or other explanation that, when the meaning of the words in an agency’s regulation are in doubt, “the administrative interpretation . . . becomes of controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. [read post]
2 Aug 2013, 1:33 pm
 The Court of Appeals holds that municipal regulation on this subject isn't preempted by state law.The Ninth Circuit delivered its last word on the subject around a year ago. [read post]
12 Mar 2008, 12:05 pm
Although the words that follow are Herrmann's, the thought is largely Rob's.Riegel says that the Medical Device Amendments do "not prevent a State from providing a damages remedy for claims premised on a violation of FDA regulations; the state duties in such a case 'parallel,' rather than add to, federal requirements. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 2:23 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The Court determined that the obvious and only natural interpretation of the document was that the Council was approving what was applied for: the variation of one condition from the original wording to the proposed wording, in effect substituting one for the other. [read post]