Search for: "Grant v. American Agencies" Results 1 - 20 of 2,944
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Feb 2023, 1:16 pm
Courts often grant such voluntary remands without ruling on the lawfulness of the challenged regulation. [read post]
31 Jan 2024, 6:22 am by Guest Author
”[9] Nonetheless, the Court continued to defer to agency interpretations of statutes with criminal implications in many contexts.[10] In Babbit v. [read post]
13 Apr 2022, 7:40 pm by Barsumian Armiger
American Imaging & MRI, LLC in which the Court held that non-hospital medical providers could be responsible for the negligent acts or omissions of their independent contractors through apparent agency. [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 4:00 am by West Coast Environmental Law
If an administrative agency claims such sweeping powers, the Court expects Congress to explicitly state that it meant to grant those powers. [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 6:14 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) under the Administrative Procedure Act challenging the HUD’s agency action of recouping alleged over-payments of Indian Housing Block Grants (“IHBG”) to CTHA under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (“NAHASDA”), 25 U.S.C. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 2:07 pm by Robert M. Jaworski
(“First American”) in which she alleged that First American violated the anti-kickback provision in RESPA by purchasing minority interests in various title agencies in return for their agreement to enter into an exclusive agency arrangement with First American Title Insurance Company (“First American Title”), a First American subsidiary. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 9:47 am by Kali Borkoski
Ball State University (Granted )Docket: 11-556Issue(s): Whether the “supervisor” liability rule established by Faragher v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 9:47 am by Kali Borkoski
Ball State University (Granted )Docket: 11-556Issue(s): Whether the “supervisor” liability rule established by Faragher v. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 10:00 am
The Appeals Court said, "Because the agency promulgated standards for fine particulate matter that were, in several respects, contrary to law and unsupported by adequately reasoned decisionmaking, we grant the petitions for review in part and remand those standards to the agency for further proceedings. [read post]
12 Jun 2018, 6:31 am by Eliot Kim
On May 21, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Jam v. [read post]
24 Sep 2014, 9:30 pm by Jonathan Mincer
Supreme Court will address in its upcoming term, is important because the Court previously granted states immunity from federal antitrust law in Parker v. [read post]