Search for: "Does 1-79"
Results 141 - 160
of 2,076
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2013, 1:57 pm
Does not touch heal-to-toe; 5.) [read post]
27 Jun 2010, 9:28 pm
Under the National Credit Code (Schedule 1 of the NCCP Act, sections 78 and 79), early exit fees which are unconscionable can be annulled or reduced by a court. [read post]
7 Nov 2012, 1:58 pm
Tisch, 686 F.3d 66, 79 (2nd Cir. 2012). [read post]
16 Aug 2017, 12:58 pm
The forth alleged violation seems to be substantially based on the argument that the UPC does not conform to EU law. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 4:20 pm
To make matters more complex, sections 155 to 157 of the revised Insurance Act are amending sections 37, 61(2), 68(1), 76(2), 78, 79(1), 80, 81, 92, 104(2), 119(2), 127(1) of the act itself. [read post]
19 Aug 2016, 6:00 am
For people 79 or older = $985.00. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 5:00 am
For people 79 or older = $985.00. [read post]
15 May 2015, 6:00 am
For people 79 or older = $985.00. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 5:15 pm
: Insider Trading as a Tool to Combat Accounting Fraud (University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 79, p. 973, 2011) on SSRN. [read post]
7 Apr 2016, 9:12 am
" [para 60]It follows that, lacking one of the two necessary conditions, ie an act of communication, there is no issue of Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive even coming into consideration. [read post]
23 Jul 2013, 5:01 pm
In particular, the EPC does not define the points in time at which the pending status of an application begins and ends in all possible situations. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 12:26 pm
DCA Decision: 79 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). [read post]
8 Apr 2017, 4:50 am
Thus, the grounds for refusal sub Article 3(1)(b)-(d) do not ensure that a certain sign is generally kept free for use over time.Unlike the absolute grounds for refusal sub Article 3(1)(b)-(d), the absolute ground relating to shapes (Article 3(1)(e) of the Trade Mark Directive) cannot be overcome by acquired distinctiveness [para 79] and, overall, “it overwhelmingly seeks to protect competition” [para 80,… [read post]
3 May 2017, 1:05 pm
Merlino, 785 F.3d 79, 82 (3d Cir. 2015).Id. at 244. [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 7:00 am
As a threshold matter, respondent argues that the appeal must be dismissed because the November 2020 order does not constitute a final judgment (see CPLR 5701 [b] [1]; Matter of Alexander M. v Cleary, 188 AD3d 1471, 1473 [2020]; see also CPLR 5701 [a] [1]). [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 7:00 am
As a threshold matter, respondent argues that the appeal must be dismissed because the November 2020 order does not constitute a final judgment (see CPLR 5701 [b] [1]; Matter of Alexander M. v Cleary, 188 AD3d 1471, 1473 [2020]; see also CPLR 5701 [a] [1]). [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 6:23 am
It does not matter how the required finding is labeled, but whether it exposes the defendant to a greater punishment than that authorized by the jury's verdict, as does the sentencing "enhancement" here. [read post]
22 Sep 2014, 4:26 am
Watson, 79 Va. [read post]
21 Sep 2022, 4:18 pm
Fish & Game Com. (2022) 79 Cal.App.5th 337, 341.) [read post]
29 Mar 2013, 10:12 am
R.V., 933 S.W.2d 1, 6 (Tex. 1996). [read post]
