Search results for: "n" (3655 results)
89 COLUM. L. REV. 1416, 1436-42 (1989). 39. I first introduced the term “sticky default” in Ayres, supra note 1, at 907 n.37. See also Ayres
bureaucracy’s supposed remove from popular control. Staszewski, supra note 8, at 1254 (“n what might be considered optimistically circular reasoning
”); Palmiter, supra note 101, at 884 n.19 (referencing investors’ use of Rule 14a-8 “to reach negotiated agreements with management without formally
Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 50 n.17 (1986) (noting that plaintiffs alleging a violation of … Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30, 50 n.17 (1986) (noting that
958(b)(4) (2018), https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-18-26.pdf https://perma.cc/Q498-QBEX. Section 3.01 of the Notice provides that Treasury and the
considered the issue more frequently. See Conn. Coll. v. City of N… Connecticut’s lower courts have considered the issue more frequently. See Conn. Coll. v
supra note 29, at 1385, 1392, 1404 n.70; Renan, supra note 30, at 266-68. Agencies also must clear their substantive views about federal legislation
Stone Sweet, Constitutional Courts, in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law 816, 817 n.3 (Michel Rosenfeld & András Sajó eds., 2012
approximately one third of Witherspoon/Witt excludables were nullifiers. 476 U.S. at 172 & n.13 See, e.g., Butler, supra note 34, at 119 (finding that only 10
with a mental-health disability). 28. See Eric N. Waltenburg & Bill Swinford, Litigating Federalism: The States Before the U.S. Supreme Court 16-17