Search for: "Bridges v. United States"
Results 141 - 160
of 1,114
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Dec 2020, 3:00 am
Bridge Aina Le’a, LLC v. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 6:44 am
”[8] The Louisiana expense attribution provisions outlined above are based on federal tax provisions aimed at preventing United States taxpayers from claiming deductions for amounts incurred to generate income not included in federal taxable income by the United States.[9] There are two Internal Revenue Code (“Code”) provisions on which the Louisiana law is based: Section 265, which addresses the treatment of interest expense… [read post]
2 Dec 2020, 2:45 am
United States, 136 S. [read post]
1 Dec 2020, 10:22 am
Doe 1 v. [read post]
1 Dec 2020, 3:00 am
Bridge Aina Le’a, LLC v. [read post]
17 Nov 2020, 11:23 am
United States – Supreme Court Opinion (SCOTUS opinion) Victory! [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 1:38 pm
Maolin Ninth Circuit Opinion (ACLU) United States v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 1:25 pm
Xavier Becerra and United States of America v. [read post]
7 Nov 2020, 9:00 pm
., Captain, Medical Corps, United States Navy THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY WASHINGTON The President of the United States takes pleasure in presenting the PRESIDENTIAL UNIT CITATION to the UNITED STATES SHIP COLE for service as set forth in the following CITATION: “For outstanding performance as guide for the first wave of landing boats in the attack on Safi, French Morocco, November 8, 1942. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 10:34 am
United States. [read post]
1 Nov 2020, 8:00 am
Supreme Court opinion in Matal v. [read post]
27 Oct 2020, 3:00 am
Bridge Aina Le’a, LLC v. [read post]
10 Oct 2020, 9:46 am
United States, 370 U.S. 294, 326, 82 S. [read post]
9 Oct 2020, 12:31 pm
Conversely, Barrett authored an opinion coded as “liberal” in United States v. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 12:53 pm
” If passed by the Senate and signed into law, the Act would clarify employer obligations set forth in the 2015 United States Supreme Court decision in Young v. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 12:53 pm
” If passed by the Senate and signed into law, the Act would clarify employer obligations set forth in the 2015 United States Supreme Court decision in Young v. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 12:53 pm
” If passed by the Senate and signed into law, the Act would clarify employer obligations set forth in the 2015 United States Supreme Court decision in Young v. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 12:53 pm
” If passed by the Senate and signed into law, the Act would clarify employer obligations set forth in the 2015 United States Supreme Court decision in Young v. [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 4:33 am
Epic Games v. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 12:54 pm
In their brief, the Defendants cite the following quote from the United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit case of Archbold-Garrett v. [read post]
