Search for: "Law v. State"
Results 461 - 480
of 173,559
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
THE NEW JERSEY DIVISION ON CIVIL RIGHTS PROPOSES NEW RULES REGARDING DISPARATE IMPACT DISCRIMINATION
8 Jul 2024, 10:56 am
Peper v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 10:40 am
First, in SEC v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 10:40 am
First, in SEC v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 10:40 am
First, in SEC v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 10:07 am
In May, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) redefined the test for nonobviousness [LKQ Corp. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 9:14 am
United States is the new Roe v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 8:23 am
Read the opinion The post QUIOLY SHIKELL DEMBY v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 8:20 am
Read the opinion The post DOMINIC COLE DAVIS v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 8:20 am
Section 706 of the APA states that courts will decide questions of law arising on review of agency action and set aside actions inconsistent with the law. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 8:15 am
Read the opinion The post DEVON MURRAY v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 8:12 am
Read the opinion The post BRANDON MAURICE HUDSON v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 8:08 am
Read the opinion The post DEREK JAMES WRIGHT v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 6:54 am
” “Chief Judge Eduardo V. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 6:39 am
This is a case of extraordinary importance to national banks and non-banks that partner with them where the objective, at least in part, is to take advantage of a national bank’s preemption of state law.... [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 6:19 am
Because of the myriad of federal, state, and local laws and regulations, employers must be mindful of any “disparate impact” the practice of conducting background checks may impose on applicants if such information were to influence an adverse employment decision such as job rejection. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 5:01 am
From Lax v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 5:00 am
" Seila Law LLC v. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 4:55 am
Idaho decided to choose the fetus over the woman (as have other red states), and the lawsuit was brought to decide whether the federal law preempted state law on the issue. [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 4:54 am
The basic principles can be stated with almost disarming ease: Pending hourly-fee cases are not “assets” of the law firm, since a law firm does not “own” a client or engagement (see In re Thelen LLP, 24 NY3d 16, 29 [2014]). [read post]
8 Jul 2024, 4:47 am
Sunshine v. [read post]
