Search for: "Beer v. United States" Results 1 - 20 of 462
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Mar 2025, 8:26 pm by John Elwood
Both Michigan and the United States concede that courts disagree about whether restitution is civil or criminal. [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In support of its argument that NJT was an "arm of the state" entitled to invoke sovereign immunity, defendants cited a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit holding that NJT is entitled to invoke sovereign immunity in federal court (see Karns v Shanahan, 879 F3d 504, 519 [3d Cir 2018]). [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In support of its argument that NJT was an "arm of the state" entitled to invoke sovereign immunity, defendants cited a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit holding that NJT is entitled to invoke sovereign immunity in federal court (see Karns v Shanahan, 879 F3d 504, 519 [3d Cir 2018]). [read post]
11 Dec 2024, 10:31 am by Rebecca Tushnet
” Ghost Adventures “provides ghost tours and related hospitality services across the United States. [read post]
20 Nov 2024, 2:35 am by Federal Employment Law Insider
” The boycott of Bud Light last year when it used a transgender influencer for a social media promotion resulted in the loss of its spot as top-selling beer in the United States. [read post]
20 Nov 2024, 2:35 am by Federal Employment Law Insider
” The boycott of Bud Light last year when it used a transgender influencer for a social media promotion resulted in the loss of its spot as top-selling beer in the United States. [read post]
5 Jul 2024, 12:30 pm by John Ross
The Supreme Court's affirmation of the ancient common law right of trial by jury in SEC v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
14 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by Austin Sarat
It noted, quoting Justice Byron White’s concurring opinion in Furman v. [read post]
8 Mar 2024, 3:28 am by Jon Hyman
We're doing DEI wrong — via Business Insider Can states legally ban "woke" training in the workplace? [read post]
19 Dec 2023, 4:28 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
Once United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) determines that two regulatory criteria have been met, it conducts a second layer of review – the “final merits determination” pursuant to Kazarian v. [read post]