Search for: "ILLINOIS v. MICHIGAN" Results 61 - 80 of 771
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Oct 2020, 1:46 pm by Kaufman Dolowich Voluck
There have been insurer-favorable decisions on motions to dismiss in federal courts out of Texas, Florida, Kansas, California, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Georgia and Minnesota and in state courts in Illinois, Michigan, Florida, California and the District of Columbia. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 2:56 pm by WIMS
Louis and southwest of a state park that contains a large lake -- Horseshoe Lake, the largest in Illinois, after Lake Michigan.  [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 9:50 am
Plaintiff, Steven Pollack is an attorney who lives in Highland Park, Illinois, thirteen miles south of the range. [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 10:04 am by Rick Hasen
The main Supreme Court case the challengers cite in their favour—a 1990 decision called Rutan v Republican Party of Illinois—doesn’t quite match up. [read post]
30 Mar 2008, 6:55 pm
The states alleged violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and the New York, Illinois and Michigan antitrust statutes. [read post]
23 Jun 2018, 6:24 am by Matthew Benedict
  People v Pomeroy and People v Fulcher, 419 Mich 44, held that a person sleeping in a motionless car was not “operating” the vehicle under Michigan’s drunk driving statute. [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 11:54 am
Alexis is a former Akin Gump summer associate and a 3L at the University of Michigan Law School. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 10:05 am by Tom Webley
” In doing so, Judge Steeh followed the reasoning of the Northern District of California, who addressed this same issue of Article III standing in connection with Michigan’s VRPA in Deacon v. [read post]
9 Sep 2018, 2:10 pm by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 150721 (ED MI, Sept. 5, 2018), a Michigan federal district court denied summary judgment for the Michigan Department of Corrections in a suit by Jewish inmates who claim that the kosher meals being provided are not adequately protected against cross-contamination that would make them non-kosher.In Gill v. [read post]