Search for: "Michigan v. Tucker" Results 1 - 20 of 45
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Nov 2017, 7:09 am by Legal Profession Prof
A Michigan attorney has been disbarred for a felony conviction Respondent was convicted in People of the State of Michigan v Jill Ann Tucker, 44th Circuit Court Case No. 16-023886-FH, ofthe following offenses: interference with the reporting of a crime,... [read post]
24 Jun 2008, 5:47 pm
Michigan Law Review, Issue 106:8 June 2008) (Past issues are available on our website.) [read post]
5 Feb 2007, 3:58 am
Morris of Silverman Morris, PLLC"Bankruptcy Judge Thomas Tucker, in Franzone v. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 6:30 am by Andrew Hamm
Briefly: Tucker Higgins of CNBC covers Monday’s request (in June Medical Services, LLC v. [read post]
16 Nov 2012, 6:08 am by Rachel Sachs
The court held that the amendment had impermissibly “reorder[ed] the political process in Michigan to place special burdens on minority interests.”  Coverage of the opinion often focused on its relationship to Fisher v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 5:40 am by Steven M. Gursten
According to Michigan Lawyers Weekly: It gives lawyers a bad name, said Norman Tucker, attorney with Sommers Schwartz PC in Southfield. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 12:01 am by Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
Thor reports on the latest developments in attorneys fee recovery in Tucker Act and Little Tucker Act cases below. [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 2:44 am
The CAFC, relying of the 1894 Schillinger decision, held that Zoltek could not assert a Fifth Amendment takings claim, since a particular claim for patent infringement by a government contractor sounded in tort and hence could not be brought against the United States under the Tucker Act. [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 2:19 pm by Medicare Set Aside Services
The opinion stated that "[t]he one-way focus of the MSPA in favor of the federal government may seem unfair, it may put Plaintiff on the horns of a dilemma given the mandate of Michigan no-fault statutes, and it may be fruitful ground for public policy debate, but the inquiry for this Court is whether the MSPA provides jurisdiction under the Tucker Act." [read post]