Search for: "Arnett v. Reade" Results 1 - 11 of 11
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Mar 2015, 7:10 am
Thus, while much of the post-oral-argument discussion in the blawgosphere has centered on whether the plaintiffs' reading of 26 § 36B(c)(2)(A)(i) would make it more coercive than, less coercive than, or equally as coercive as the Medicaid expansion conditions invalidated in NFIB v. [read post]
10 Sep 2009, 7:54 am by Randall Hodgkinson
CoxWhether intoxilyzer reading is sufficient to sustain DUI convictionOctober 29--Thursday--a.m.State v. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 3:38 am by Terry Hart
That alone is well worth a read if you want to know what the Settlement is all about. [read post]
29 Aug 2013, 8:20 am by Gerald Maatman, Jr.
It is right up there and appears to be one of the six largest in recent history (the other “top ten” are set out below for context) and the third largest gender discrimination class action settlement. 1. $250 million – Arnett v. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 1:32 pm by Venkat
I think this reading excessively parses the ruling, but check out their view: "Revised UMB v. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 5:57 am by Rob Robinson
.: Taking A Step Back - (Cynthia Courtney) Plaintiffs v. [read post]