Search for: "Daniel E. Walters" Results 141 - 160 of 193
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Feb 2022, 11:29 am by Geoffrey Manne
Empirical research by Hsu and Ziedonis, for instance, supports this hypothesis:  [W]e find a statistically significant and economically large effect of patent filings on investor estimates of start-up value…. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 10:06 am by Schachtman
Gassert, Tony Fletcher, and Yv Bonnier Viger. 7 John Henderson Duffus, Ronald E. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 9:30 pm by RegBlog
Improving Regulatory Processes Around the World Daniel E. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 12:50 pm by Matthew Scott Johnson
Murphy’s article Arbitrariness Review Made Reasonable: Structural and Conceptual Reform of the “Hard Look” is cited in the following article: Daniel E. [read post]
3 Jan 2012, 4:31 pm by Gustavo Arballo
 Podeti sobre la Ley de estímulo al protesto e indignación. [read post]
24 Sep 2007, 3:06 am
Walter Olson at Overlawyered doesn't hide his: he supports tort reform. [read post]
24 Sep 2007, 3:06 am
Walter Olson at Overlawyered doesn't hide his: he supports tort reform. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 4:18 pm by Kevin LaCroix
For example, “[w]e have extensive procedures and controls that are designed to identify and address conflicts of interest,” and “[o]ur clients’ interests always come first. [read post]
25 Dec 2017, 9:40 pm by The Regulatory Review
Why Cabinet Secretaries Should Not Threaten Members of Congress August 14, 2017  | Cary Coglianese, Gabriel Scheffler, and Daniel E. [read post]
25 Dec 2017, 9:40 pm by The Regulatory Review
Why Cabinet Secretaries Should Not Threaten Members of Congress August 14, 2017  | Cary Coglianese, Gabriel Scheffler, and Daniel E. [read post]
11 Apr 2022, 11:57 pm by Ryan Goodman
House of Representatives Captain Carneysha Mendoza (Testimony) Field Commander Special Operations Division United States Capitol Police (USCP) House Energy & Commerce Committee (February 24, 2021) House Energy &… [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 1:16 pm by Bexis
., 594 F.3d 238, 253 (3d Cir. 2010):[W]e have exercised restraint in accordance with the well-established principle that where two competing yet sensible interpretations of state law exist, we should opt for the interpretation that restricts liability, rather than expands it, until the Supreme Court of [that state] decides differently.Lexington National Insurance Corp. v. [read post]