Search for: "EIDSON v. STATE" Results 1 - 14 of 14
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Nov 2013, 11:56 am
  Since there can be no claim for violating a regulation that doesn’t exist, plaintiff’s claim on this basis is also expressly preempted.That leaves two additional off-label promotion claims and here the court followed the lead of Eidson v. [read post]
22 Dec 2007, 7:31 am
This court upheld Smith's conviction and sentence in 2004, but the Supreme Court vacated his sentence in light of United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2014, 11:17 am
Ever since the FDA decided that discretion was the better part of valor – or read the handwriting on the wall – and decided not to appeal United States v. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 6:48 pm
NLRB Law Memo 07/17/2008 by LawMemo - First in Employment Law. [read post]