This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The case was currently pending before the Fourth Circuit after a federal district court in Maryland held that Maryland law preempted the local law. The court rejected DLNR’s argument that a 2017 Hawaii Supreme Courtdecision requiring environmental review for aquarium fishing only applied to fishing with fine-meshed nets.
The district court dismissed Konans claims, finding them barred by the postal exception. It reasoned that loss and miscarriage cover intentional acts, as the statute only qualifies transmission with negligent. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit reversed , holding that the exception doesnt apply to intentional nondelivery.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which by a vote of 2-1 upheld the district courtsdecision. The enactment of Title III, he contended established a specific, independent, and exclusive cause of action for American nations whose property the Cuban government had confiscated decades earlier.
The Court held that the provision used “extension” in its “temporal sense,” but that the statute did not impose a “continuity requirement” and instead allowed small refineries to apply for hardship extensions “at any time.” Hawai‘i Supreme Court Upheld Denial of Request to Re-Open Order Approving Wind Power Purchase Agreement.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content