Search for: "Does 2-13" Results 81 - 100 of 19,845
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Aug 2017, 1:00 am by Sander van Rijnswou
A non-exhaustive list of criteria to be included in the board's exercise of discretion is given in Article 13(1) RPBA.The appellant argued that, because respondent 2 had not made a case under Article 12 RPBA, respondent 2's letter dated 13 April 2017 had to be disregarded.However, the board does not derive from the provisions of Articles 12 and 13 RPBA that a party that did not file any submissions within the four months of notification… [read post]
8 May 2012, 8:41 pm
Driver has been previously convicted of § 39-13-213(a)(2) (vehicular homicide), § 39-13-218 (aggravated vehicular homicide) or § 55-10-401 (DUI); or 2. [read post]
8 May 2012, 8:41 pm
Driver has been previously convicted of § 39-13-213(a)(2) (vehicular homicide), § 39-13-218 (aggravated vehicular homicide) or § 55-10-401 (DUI); or 2. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 7:58 am by Janet R. Stewart
SERIES: Bankruptcy and Distressed Property in a Domestic Relations MatterPart 1- How Bankruptcy Affects Distressed Property in Divorce or Dissolution: The Basics Part 2- What is an Automatic Stay and How Does it Affect Divorce? [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 3:53 am by Brandee Bower
DORA follows the Uniform Arbitration Act, Section 13-22-201, and specifically Section 13-22-211(2) which sets forth the... . [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 7:43 pm by Mary Pat Dwyer
Versata Software, Inc. 13-716 Issue: (1) Whether a computer software manufacturer may be liable for direct infringement of a patent drawn to computer instructions where the software, as shipped, does not contain sufficient instructions to perform the claimed operations; (2) whether flaws in an expert’s methodology may be raised as part of a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence or only to the testimony’s admissibility; and (3) whether a patent… [read post]
3 Feb 2008, 12:15 am
The High Court has published its reasons for its decision in Attorney-General (Cth) v Alinta Limited [2008] HCA 2 (originally announced on 13 December 2007) that section 657A(2)(b) of the Corporations Act was not invalid for purporting to confer the power on the Takeovers Panel to declare circumstances relating to the takeover of a company to be unacceptable. [read post]
1 Jun 2008, 2:23 pm
In Chapter 13 cases filed in the Northern District of Georgia, the standard plan used by all three trustees has a place where the debtor has to check off that he does or does not owe a domestic support obligation and if he does, the address where he sends the money. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 6:02 pm
View the article here Jeffrey Epstein New Lawsuit 1 (351.9KB) Jeffrey Epstein New Lawsuit 2 (93.2KB) Out come the gold-diggers! [read post]