Search for: "Peoples Drug Stores v. District of Columbia"
Results 41 - 56
of 56
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Apr 2012, 4:00 pm
It simply failed to comply with the terms of the warrant – that a device be installed in the District of Columbia within 10 days, leading the government to argue that it wasn’t legally required to obtain one. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 6:56 am
The suit claims that the “companies got drug stores…to substitute the form without a price cap, charging two to five times the price for the capped dosage form. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 10:11 am
Answer: No The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled it could, a decision the justices reversed. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 766 N.E.2d 1118, 1127 (Ill. 2002) (applied to pharmacists); Hansen v. [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 7:59 pm
It also stored hazardous waste for more than 90 days. [read post]
7 Apr 2010, 3:44 pm
Click Here EPA Settles with Drug and Laboratory Disposal on Hazardous Waste Violations. [read post]
December 29, 2009 – Environmental Law Settlements, Decisions, Regulatory Actions and Lawsuit Filings
29 Dec 2009, 5:50 pm
District Court in Birmingham. [read post]
December 29, 2009 – Environmental Law Settlements, Decisions, Regulatory Actions and Lawsuit Filings
29 Dec 2009, 5:46 pm
District Court in Birmingham. [read post]
16 Mar 2009, 2:13 pm
Since then, lower federal courts have decided more than 80 cases interpreting the decision, District of Columbia v. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 10:00 pm
District of Columbia, 747 A.2d 138145 (D.C. 2000); Mervin v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 6:15 pm
Supreme Court, June 18, 2008 Munaf v. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 9:18 am
District Judge Charles A. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 4:00 am
With this neighborhood safety zone plan, the District of Columbia will already be a police state. [read post]
28 Mar 2008, 6:00 am
- Anonymity of policy research group quoted on pharma patenting policy and stats: (Spicy IP),Thailand: More news/reactions on compulsory licenses: (Generic Pharmaceuticals & IP),US: Follow-on biologic drugs and patent law: A potential disconnect? [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 8:11 am
Davis, No. 06-5883, 06-6235 A conviction for drug-related offenses is affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) denial of his motion to suppress drugs found during his arrests; 2) denial of his motion to exclude two expert witnesses at his trial; 3) denial of his motion for a mistrial based on prosecutorial misconduct; and 4) three statements which allegedly constituted prosecutorial misconduct. [read post]
28 Dec 2007, 1:00 am
: (IPBiz),Sinorgchem v. [read post]
