Documents

Amicus Curiae Brief — Marietta Memorial Hospital Employee Health Benefit Plan, et al., Petitioners v. DaVita Inc., et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Dec 22, 2021

Expensive ancillary services such as air ambulances may be needed. Even if not legally required dialysis is part of the preferred benefits set. … See comment on “commercial” payers in note 90, supra. 92 See UnitedHealthcare of Florida v. American Renal Associates, U.S.D.Ct. No. 9:16-cv-81180-KAM (S.D.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Tory v. Cochran

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2005

Varian had expected Delfino and Day to act like countless others who have faced a similar situation and simply stopped speaking out once they saw what it would take to fight for their rights. … That the air may at times seem filled with verbal cacophony is, in this sense not a sign of weakness but of strength.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Monsanto Company, Petitioner v. John L. Durnell

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Apr 1, 2026

Bartholomew et al., Glyphosate Exposure Exacerbates Neuroinflammation and Alzheimer’s Disease-Like Pathology Despite a 6-Month Recovery Period in Mice, 21 J. … 2025) (reviewing risks posed by endocrine disruptors and factors making early-life exposures more harmful to children, including immature blood–brain barrier and detoxification enzymes, higher intake of air

Amicus Curiae Brief — Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2006

Whatever the practice of this Court in the period before Erie R.R. v. … For example, the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Transportation by Air, Oct. 12, 1929, 49 Stat. 3000, T.S.

Amicus Curiae Brief — American Electric Power Service Co. Corp. v. Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County, Washington (Nos. 06-1462, 06-1457)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2007

. _ Attorneys for the Natural Gas Supply Association August 6, 2007 yrs i QUESTIONS PRESENTED Under the Natural Gas Act and the Federal Power Act, as interpreted by this Court in United Gas Pipe … Any change in a legal regime that acts, as do the.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Elec. Power Supply Ass'n, 135 S. Ct. 2049 (2015) (No. 14-840)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2015

Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, § 1252(f), 119 Stat. 594, 966 (“EPAct”). … See, e.g., Delaware Public Service Commission Comments to FERC Regarding D.C.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Moon v. North Idaho Farmers Ass'n

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2005

Finally, two brief comments concerning the merits of petitioners’ claim are warranted. … The issue in Webb’s was whether the state legislature could appropriate interest on the fund by charac- terizing it as “public money” for a temporary period. Jd. at 163-64.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Ross v. Moffitt

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1974

Indeed, if the Court is correct it may be that we should first clean up our own house. We have afforded indigent litigants much less protection than has California. … furter was particularly persistent in commenting that the Court’s refusal to grant certiorari was of no significance insofar as the issues before the Court were concerned (See Maryland v.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Gilbert v. Homar

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1997

Loudermill, 470 (AIRS EE passim Engdahl v. Department of Navy, 900 F.2d 1572 (Fred. Clr. 1908) ..cecccccccsosescesecesrsesesnersssesisnsnscenssensnnnios 16 FDIC v. … Far from the almost ministerial act petitioners portray, Levanowitz’ decision to suspend Homar for an indefinite period independent of the resolution of the criminal charges against him— and the decision

Amicus Curiae Brief — Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Massachusetts

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1985

Delta Air Lines Inc., 103 S. Ct. 2890 (1983).. 9,22, 23, 36-38 Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp., 104 S. … Delta Air Lines, Inc., 103 S. Ct. 2890 (1983).

Amicus Curiae Brief — Americans for Prosperity Foundation, Petitioner v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Mar 1, 2021

Id. at 484 (cleaned up). … Id. at 485 (cleaned up). III.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Assn.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1992

which would have permitted states to impose stricter occupational protection requirements than those imposed by OSHA, without having to obtain OSHA's approval of a state plan during a transitional period … Indeed, given the fact that SARA encourages regulatory partnership between federal, state and local governments in the area of hazardous waste site clean up, see n. 4 supra, these state regulations

Amicus Curiae Brief — Manhattan Community Access Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. DeeDee Halleck, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Dec 11, 2018

A newspaper’s opinion section or online comment forum 10 can allow for the airing of different and competing perspectives. A shopping mall can allow competing brands to have a storefront. … Concretely, many websites would rather disable comment functionality entirely than have to justify comment moderation under the rigorous standards of the First Amendment.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Louisiana Public Service Commission v. South Central Bell Telephone Co.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1985

In re Prescription of Revised Percentages of Depre- 3’ The FCC historically has called periodic “three-way meet- ings” of telephone companies and federal and state regulators to consider depreciation … Commentators agree that Sec- tion 1254(2), like 28 U.S.C. 1257(2), should be subject to a “final judgment” requirement. 17 C. Wright, A. Miller & E.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Ohio, Petitioner v. Janet L. Yellen, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Apr 13, 2023

(cleaned up). Second, the offer cannot be coercive: Congress may not attach conditions to funding offers that States have no “legitimate choice” but to “accept.” … “The only way for the States to achieve unequivocal compliance with the Act is to refrain from cutting taxes during the covered period.” West Virginia, 59 F.4th at 1138. B.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n v. Elec. Power Supply Ass'n, 135 S. Ct. 2049 (2015) (No. 14-840)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2015

and the Federal Power Act. … See, e.g., Comments of the Electric Power Supply Association, FERC Docket No. EL15-21-000 (Dec. 4, 2014).

Amicus Curiae Brief — Janus v. Am. Fed'n, 138 S. Ct. 54 (2017) (No. 16-1466)

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2017

The Machinists Union is one of the larg- est rail and airline workers’ unions in the country, representing approximately 175,000 railroad and air- line workers covered by the Railway Labor Act, 45 … Its current members, including those subject to the Railway Labor Act, the National Labor Relations Act, and various state laws governing public employees, have a vital interest in the outcome of this

Amicus Curiae Brief — City of Albuquerque v. Homans

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2004

Act 64 (H. 28)(finding 9). … As one commentator has observed: It is clear that states have been activists in the area of campaign finance regulation.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC, Petitioner v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Jan 7, 2021

Vornado Air Circulation Sys., 535 U.S. 826 (2002) .......................................... 5 JTEKT Corp. v. GKN Auto. LTD., 898 F.3d 1217 (Fed. Cir. 2018), cert. denied, 139 S. … The competitive harm from a questionable patent starts upstream, long before litigation or any concrete plan of infringement, much less a past infringing act.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Gene Gonzales, et al., Petitioners v. Jay Inslee, Governor of Washington, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Apr 17, 2024

Cedar Point Nursery, 594 U.S. at 150 (cleaned up and citations omitted). … Babcock & Wilcox Co., 351 U.S. 105 (1956) involved “protecting employees’ rights of collective bargaining under the [National Labor Relations] Act”) (emphasis added).