Search for: "State v. Alabama Power Co." Results 221 - 240 of 297
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Sep 2011, 6:54 am
Alabama Power Co., 483 F.3d 1184, 1197 (11th Cir. 2007), it seems strange that Congress would have wanted to funnel class actions filed by means of an original complaint into federal court but keep those filed by means of a counterclaim in state court. [read post]
20 Aug 2011, 4:00 am
At issue was whether the district court erred in using the Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 7:32 am by velvel
In the fourth of the cases, Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 5:49 pm by Peter Tillers
.); and (v) Art & Science – the many ways of epistemic insights.He has been awarded grants by German states for development of new ways in teaching functional illiterates mathematics, together with Marie-Cecile Bertau for her Gilgamesh project, as well as for his Theory of Trust project. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 3:25 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
What’s Happening in Washington Dan Jaffe, Executive Vice President, Government Relations, ANA It’s within our power to affect how present challenges are resolved. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 8:12 pm by Christa Culver
Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd.Docket: 10-770Issue(s): Whether, contrary to this Court's decision in KSR International Co. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 7:47 am by The Legal Blog
Alabama Power Co. (1927) 240 US 30 and held:"We do not think that the reasoning of the High Court is correct. [read post]
2 Jan 2011, 12:13 pm by Mike Aylward
Co. of the State of Pennsylvania, S153852 (Cal. [read post]
29 Dec 2010, 12:54 pm by Bexis
  We’re frankly shocked that the coercive power of any state would be put behind such a flimsy theory. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 8:29 pm by Lyle Denniston
” Urging en banc rehearing, the state argued that the Circuit Court decision conflicts directly with a Supreme Court ruling in 1987 — International Paper Co. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 5:30 am
Alabama Power Co., 483 F.3d 1184, 1207 (11th Cir. 2007), the defendants being the removing parties, bore the burden of establishing the court’s jurisdiction. [read post]