Search for: "Gould Securities Co. v. United States" Results 1 - 20 of 28
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jan 2023, 3:03 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Co. v Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, 56 AD3d 1, 13 [1st Dept 2008]).Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment on their account stated counterclaim, as their claim for legal fees is intertwined with plaintiffs’ legal malpractice claim. [read post]
12 Aug 2020, 5:01 am by Rachael Hanna
On July 20, the Ninth Circuit declined to rehear en banc Fazaga v. [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 4:32 am by Edith Roberts
For The Washington Post, Ellen Nakashima reports that the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. [read post]
26 Jul 2007, 11:18 am
Gould, Inc., 475 U.S. 282, 290 (1986) (prior labor precedent).Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 7:00 am by Guest Blogger
This movement for securing civic education in schools may also bolster or benefit from other movements to gain expanded implementation of state constitutional rights to education. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 8:50 am by Aaron
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/01/04/09-50113.pdf United States v. [read post]
10 Jun 2020, 8:38 am by John Elwood
United States, 19-7732, involves Rogers’ co-defendant Jerad Hanks and raises the same issue. [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 7:00 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com]   Highlights this week included: CAFC: In re Comiskey rehearing en banc falls two votes short; important dissent by Moore J (Hal Wegner) (Inventive Step) (Patently-O) (Washington State Patent Law Blog) (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Law360) (Patent Prospector) District Court Delaware: Document shredding voids 12 Rambus patents: Rambus v Micron… [read post]
14 May 2012, 7:22 am by Rebecca Shafer, J.D.
United States Department of Health and Human Services & Kathleen Sebelius, here. [read post]
13 Jul 2023, 12:06 pm by Legal Aggregate
The event was co-sponsored by the Stanford Center for Racial Justice and the Stanford Constitutional Law Center. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
  The letter stated that petitioner would “be responsible for providing instruction to students assigned to [i]n-[s]chool [s]uspension. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
  The letter stated that petitioner would “be responsible for providing instruction to students assigned to [i]n-[s]chool [s]uspension. [read post]