Search for: "Doles v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 504
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jan 2010, 5:49 pm
Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) v. [read post]
30 Sep 2013, 6:51 am
Brazil v. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 8:21 am
South Dakota v Dole held that the Congress could demand that states raise their drinking age as a condition for receiving federal highway funds. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 12:53 pm
Dole as to when conditional federal grants to states are permissible.2. [read post]
11 Sep 2008, 7:58 pm
Dole Nut Co. (1995). [read post]
27 Aug 2008, 9:43 pm
Dole Nut Co. (1995). [read post]
13 Jan 2013, 4:20 pm
The Supreme Court hears argument Wednesday in Gunn v. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 10:18 am
" Dole v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 4:05 am
Participating States must also comply with various other requirements, including those that protect against waste, fraud, and abuse; those that protect the health and safety, and the privacy, of Medicaid beneficiaries; those that ensure that the States adequately accomplish the goals of the program (see the recent decision in Douglas v. [read post]
12 May 2020, 9:00 pm
Do South Dakota v. [read post]
7 Mar 2015, 10:15 am
As the Court stated in Dole, the rules it lays out in that case apply to conditions on “th [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 11:02 am
Co. v. [read post]
9 May 2011, 4:00 am
The Case of the Day, Osorio v. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 6:36 am
On January 23, 2013, a group of major universities and technology transfer offices filed an amicus brief urging the United States Supreme Court to affirm the Federal Circuit in Monsanto v. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 2:00 am
University v. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 2:00 am
University v. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 4:00 am
Dole and the Medicaid expansion/Spending Clause portion of NFIB v. [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 2:12 am
In University of Rochester v. [read post]
9 Jun 2022, 6:05 am
But the cases it cites—like Jones v. [read post]
16 Sep 2008, 4:35 am
In the context of a discussion on the Patent Hawk blog about an article in the New York Times on the Bayh-Dole Act, one had the following commentary about University of Rochester v. [read post]
