Search for: "Walsh v. Walsh" Results 121 - 140 of 1,709
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Oct 2021, 1:25 pm by lennyesq
  BY MARK WALSH  *** The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2021, 4:36 am by Peter J. Sluka
  That’s the tough lesson that an LLC member facing termination of his membership status learned in Costello v Molloy et al., 73 Misc 3d 1206(A) [Sup Ct 2021]. [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 5:42 am by James Romoser
Alito says high court is no such thing (Casey Smith & Jessica Gresko, Associated Press) The Supreme Court is in the building — contentious rulings behind, more major cases ahead (Mark Walsh, ABA Journal) Mississippi abortion clinic braces for Supreme Court showdown over Roe v. [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 5:00 pm by Karen K. Hartford
In August, the DOL and the New York Attorney General reached a $15.6 million settlement in a first-of-its-kind case initiated directly against an administrative service provider for violations of MHPAEA (Walsh v. [read post]
26 Aug 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  My gratitude extends to others (very much including Smith, Zambrano, Tyler, Grove, and Walsh) whose work has taught me so much and whose comments [read post]
25 Aug 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
For some readers, including perhaps Pushaw and Walsh, the history itself may prove dispositive, combining as it does both a proposed reading of the text and a set of practices under that text that help to liquidate its meaning. [read post]
17 Aug 2021, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Walsh (kwalsh@richmond.edu) is Professor of Law at the University of Richmond School of Law   [read post]
1 Aug 2021, 10:20 am by Michael DeRose
Notably, the topic of delayed IA investigations was touched on in a well-known Superior Court case entitled Aristizibal v. [read post]
18 Jul 2021, 7:11 pm by Will Baude
One on Dissenting Opinions, a conversation with Kevin Walsh about severability doctrine, focusing on the perplexing case of Barr v. [read post]
The court considered the proximity in space and time to the workplace, the pressure for employees to attend, and the following facts: The majority of the people at each party were employees;The employer sponsored the initial party;It provided alcohol and encouraged employees to drink;The after-party was a continuation of the first party; andThe employer may have known about Walsh’s previous inappropriate behavior.Phelps v. [read post]
The court considered the proximity in space and time to the workplace, the pressure for employees to attend, and the following facts: The majority of the people at each party were employees;The employer sponsored the initial party;It provided alcohol and encouraged employees to drink;The after-party was a continuation of the first party; andThe employer may have known about Walsh’s previous inappropriate behavior.Phelps v. [read post]