Search for: "State v. Plan" Results 1881 - 1900 of 29,593
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Oct 2015, 1:06 pm
  The compensation amount under Section 1.61 21(f)(5)(iii) remains unchanged at $215,000.The Code provides that the $1,000,000,000 threshold used to determine whether a multiemployer plan is a systematically important plan under section 432(e)(9)(H)(v)(III)(aa) is adjusted using the cost-of-living adjustment provided under Section 432(e)(9)(H)(v)(III)(bb). [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 7:15 pm by Maureen Johnston
The petition of the day is: Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan v. [read post]
17 Aug 2022, 3:00 am by Chip Merlin
—Ringo Starr ___________________________________________________1Winston v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 11:45 am by Bill Raftery
During the testimony Justice Johnson is reported to have stated she rejected a plan that would have had her wait until 2017 to take the seat as chief justice. [read post]
24 Jul 2019, 12:18 pm by Melissa Murray
In this regard, these laws effectively function as pre-viability bans on abortion, in violation of Roe and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
11 Jul 2015, 8:27 am by Nassiri Law
The effort started a few years ago when, as our Orange County employee attorneys can explain, the state legislature passed a law to establish a state-run retirement savings plan that would cover over 6 million employees working the private sector. [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 7:07 am
Interesting case out of the United States District Court for the District of Maine the other day, concerning a challenge by a plan participant to how his long term disability payments were calculated. [read post]