Search for: "Davis v. Mills" Results 81 - 100 of 114
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jun 2011, 2:51 am by Will Aitchison
Davis Security, Inc., 217 F.Supp.2d 1224, 1228 (D.Utah 2002) (dismissing the plaintiff’s common law claims as “merely duplicative” of her FLSA claim); see also Anderson v. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 4:15 am by Philip Thomas
Over the weekend I compared the Court's decision to the Mississippi Supreme Court's 2007 opinion in the Ford Motor Co. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 3:01 pm by Pace Law School Library
Dirty dishes, dirty laundry, and windy mills: a framework for regulation of clean energy devices. 40 Envtl. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 2:13 am
Merpel says, let's not forget that other traders have an interest in the V-word too: see, for example, here, here and here.Vuvuzelas and health here and hereYou say potato, I say tomato, hereThank you, Jim Davies, for the link. [read post]
25 May 2010, 5:00 am by Philip Thomas
NMC reported last week on the Order issued by Northern District federal court Judge Mills in the Maggette v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 9:30 pm by admin
Click Here Settlement Clears Path for Demolition and Cleanup of the Aerovox Mill, in New Bedford, Mass. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 2:04 am
Update on CAN-SPAM complaint mills' tenuous legal posture Davis Wright Tremaine LLP "In our entry CAN-SPAM Complaint Mills - Time For A New Business Model? [read post]
4 Jul 2009, 5:50 pm by Jason Krebs
BOX 4280 ELLINGTON MO-Missouri  80 STRAUBS 15830 FOUNTAIN PLAZA DRIVE ELLISVILLE MO-Missouri  81 Fairway Groceries 14100 Redfield Drive Eugene MO-Missouri  82 John's Super 960 Isley Excelsior Spring MO-Missouri  83 Price Chopper 1645 Kearney Road Excelsior Spring MO-Missouri  84 SUMMER FRESH MARKET 163 OLD MILL RD. [read post]
23 Dec 2008, 2:57 pm
Davis, No. 07-1964 A conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of cocaine base with intent to distribute is affirmed where: 1) although a vehicular safety statute involving dangling ornaments that police relied upon to make the stop at issue was unconstitutionally vague; 2) nevertheless, the exclusionary rule did not apply as police were relying in good faith on a presumptively valid statute. [read post]
13 Sep 2008, 7:10 pm
(Editor’s Note: This comes to us from Gar Bason, Phillip Mills and Justine Lee of Davis Polk & Wardwell.) [read post]