Search for: "State of Texas v. U.s., Interstate Commerce Commission" Results 41 - 60 of 66
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Aug 2010, 7:50 am by Matthew Scarola
Federal Election Commission and its 2007 decision in Federal Election Commission v. [read post]
9 Nov 2020, 11:09 am by Richard Reibstein Esq.
  Pet sitters are employees and not independent contractors according to a Missouri appeals court, which affirmed a state Labor Commission’s decision against 417 Pet Sitting, LLC. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 7:34 am by Stephen Wermiel
First, he wanted to underscore the votes and organization of a complex set of opinions that upheld the individual insurance mandate under Congress’s taxing power but rejected its power to regulate interstate commerce and invalidated the compelled expansion of Medicaid in the states. [read post]
23 Dec 2008, 2:57 pm
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, December 17, 2008 US v. [read post]
21 Jan 2021, 12:54 pm by John Elwood
Hawaii Land Use Commission, 20-54Issues: (1) Whether, as the U.S. [read post]
24 May 2007, 10:40 am
"Well, state court judges are savvy and powerful people. [read post]
1 Aug 2014, 9:45 am by Glenn
As the Supreme Court emphasized in 1993, “[e]ven an act of pure malice by one business competitor against another does not, without more, state a claim under the federal antitrust laws; those laws do not create a federal law of unfair competition or ‘purport to afford remedies for all torts committed by or against persons engaged in interstate commerce. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 7:52 am by John Elwood
The new year took an early turn for the worse with our reigning relist heavyweight, Kalamazoo County Road Commission v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 10:36 am by Robert B. Milligan and Daniel P. Hart
§ 1831(a) and 1832(a) of the EEA and for “misappropriation of a trade secret that is related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm by Matthew Finkin
The courts denied the motion under governing California law and Viking sought review in the U.S. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 3:21 pm
The Lanham Act derives from the Commerce Clause, not the Spending Clause, and its purpose is to regulate marks used in interstate commerce — not to subsidize the markholders. [read post]
 As the Ohio complaint states, “In sweeping terms, [the Rule] purports to extend federal regulatory jurisdiction over broad swaths of the country, including vast areas within the States of Ohio and Michigan, that in no way constitute navigable, potentially navigable, or interstate waters—even in various instances reaching land that is typically dry. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 12:17 pm by David G. Badertscher
The deal calls for GSK to plead guilty to introducing four types of adulterated drugs for delivery into interstate commerce from March 2003 to October 2004. [read post]