Search for: "Garcia v. Usa*"
Results 1 - 20
of 141
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
Inst. v. [read post]
2 Apr 2024, 2:30 pm
” The policy does not define “incur” but the Texas Supreme Court has done our work for us here, relying on dictionaries to define “incur” to mean to “become liable for,” Garcia v. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 7:10 am
See, Pohl v. [read post]
15 Jan 2024, 11:40 am
In T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 2:13 am
ATTORNEY’S FEES ■Jose Parra, Applicant v. [read post]
27 Dec 2023, 4:17 pm
In United States v. [read post]
7 Nov 2023, 12:19 pm
In the seminal case Garcia v. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 8:59 am
Garcia (Elsa) v. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 1:03 pm
Sony v. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 4:44 am
Putting aside the idiosyncratic chapter by the late Professor Berger, most of the third edition of the Reference Manual presented guidance on many important issues. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 3:27 am
Futuro Investigates and Latino USA —in partnership with Lemonada... [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 5:55 am
In Ileto v. [read post]
26 Aug 2022, 4:00 am
White Coats in the State Capital: OB-GYNs become political force in abortion wars Yahoo News – Alice Miranda Ollstein and Megan Messerly (Politico) | Published: 8/22/2022 Physicians, many of whom have never mobilized politically, are banding together in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. [read post]
8 Jul 2022, 7:14 pm
Brad Garcia clerked on the D.C. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:08 pm
" In light of the foregoing, and given that no contrary medical opinions were presented, the Board's factual determination that claimant suffered from an occupational disease resulting from repetitive stress is supported by substantial evidence and will not be disturbed (see Matter of Garcia v MCI Interiors, Inc., 158 AD3d 907, 908 [2018]; Matter of Curtis v Xerox, 66 AD3d 1106, 1108 [2009]). [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:08 pm
" In light of the foregoing, and given that no contrary medical opinions were presented, the Board's factual determination that claimant suffered from an occupational disease resulting from repetitive stress is supported by substantial evidence and will not be disturbed (see Matter of Garcia v MCI Interiors, Inc., 158 AD3d 907, 908 [2018]; Matter of Curtis v Xerox, 66 AD3d 1106, 1108 [2009]). [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am
(UAW) v Yard-Man, Inc. (716 F2d 1476 [6th Cir 1983], cert denied 465 US 1007 [1984]) and its progeny. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am
(UAW) v Yard-Man, Inc. (716 F2d 1476 [6th Cir 1983], cert denied 465 US 1007 [1984]) and its progeny. [read post]
24 Jan 2022, 11:03 am
That decision is First Solar, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 12:00 pm
In Milieudefensie et al. v. [read post]
