Search for: "DOES 1-9" Results 161 - 180 of 27,512
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jan 2010, 11:26 am by Bill Marler
I love getting these email updates as of late from Linda's brother-in-law: Sent: Sat, January 23, 2010 9:46:41 AM Subject: Linda Rivera Continued Improvement 1-23-2010 @ 9:45am PST Linda continues to improve, slowly, but surely. [read post]
12 May 2009, 7:49 pm
., General Medical Center, a Corporation, and Does 1 through 250, inclusive, Defendants. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 8:20 am by Helen Klein
In re Yamashita, 327 U.S. 1, 9 (1946) (“[T]he Executive branch of the government could not, unless there was suspension of the writ, withdraw from the courts the duty and power to make such inquiry into the authority of the commission as may be made by habeas corpus. [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 2:35 pm by Steven J. Tinnelly, Esq.
*New Legislation Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) was recently signed into law making revisions to the California Government Code effective January 1, 2022. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 8:50 am by Federalist Society
This case considered whether judicial participation in plea negotiation, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1), automatically requires the vacating of a subsequent guilty plea--regardless of whether the violation prejudiced the defendant.By a vote of 9-0 the Court held, per an opinion by Justice Ginsburg, judicial participation in violation of Rule 11(c)(1) does not require that a defendant’s guilty plea be vacated if the record shows… [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 8:50 am by Federalist Society
This case considered whether judicial participation in plea negotiation, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1), automatically requires the vacating of a subsequent guilty plea--regardless of whether the violation prejudiced the defendant.By a vote of 9-0 the Court held, per an opinion by Justice Ginsburg, judicial participation in violation of Rule 11(c)(1) does not require that a defendant’s guilty plea be vacated if the record shows… [read post]
18 Apr 2015, 2:21 am by Drew Falkenstein
According to a statement released by the agency on Wednesday, there are currently 12 people sickened in four provinces (Alberta, 9; Saskatchewan, 1; Ontario, 1, and Newfoundland and Labrador, 1). [read post]
8 Aug 2013, 8:56 am by Bill Marler
The number of cases identified in each area is as follows: Texas (190), Iowa (153), Nebraska (85), Florida (27), Wisconsin (11), Illinois (9), Arkansas (5), New York City (5), Georgia (4), Kansas (3), Louisiana (3), Missouri (3), Ohio (2), Connecticut (1), Minnesota (1), New Jersey (1), and New York (1). [read post]
8 Jun 2016, 4:15 am by Howard Friedman
A press release by the Court summarized the Court's reasoning:Mr Aydemir’s complaints did not involve a form of manifestation of a religion or belief through worship, teaching, practice or observance within the meaning of Article 9 § 1. [read post]
5 Feb 2017, 7:05 pm by Cordisco & Saile Web Team
L.1986, c. 39 (C.12:7-57) at any time within 90 days after the commission of the offense; and for a violation of R.S.39:3-40, or section 1 of P.L.1942, c. 192 (C.39:4-128.1), at any time within 90 days after the commission of the offense.c. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 11:27 am by PritzkerLaw
In this week's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), the CDC reports 9 cases of listeriosis in the United States for  week ending October 8, 2011 (40th Week) and a total of 548 cases as of October 8 for 2011. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 11:27 am by PritzkerLaw
In this week's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), the CDC reports 9 cases of listeriosis in the United States for  week ending October 8, 2011 (40th Week) and a total of 548 cases as of October 8 for 2011. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 1:30 pm
You may have missed it, because it came without fanfare and does not seem to have made the data security trade press, but in early May, the State of Vermont updated its data security law. [read post]
25 Aug 2023, 10:05 am by Unknown
Thus, this accommodation of the Section 9(c) election right with the Section 8(a)(5) duty to recognize and bargain with the designated majority representative will only be honored if, and as long as, the employer does not frustrate the election process by its unlawful conduct. [read post]