Search for: "Adoption of D. S. C. (1979)"
Results 181 - 200
of 211
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Feb 2010, 1:32 pm
But the State’s claim that Ms. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 4:32 am
Nothing in this act shall be construed to limit the effect of section 2 of P.L.1979, c.428 (C.18A:35-4.7). [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 4:30 am
Super. 373, 379 (Law Div. 1979). [read post]
13 Sep 2009, 7:24 pm
Supp. 889, 895 (D. [read post]
23 Jun 2009, 11:20 pm
As I noted in an earlier post, in the 1979 Smith v. [read post]
4 Jun 2009, 11:31 pm
Justice Breyer, who often takes the opposite side of the statutory interpretation debate, chastised the majority fin that case for adopting an interpretation contrary to the text's meaning. [read post]
11 Mar 2009, 10:27 am
§ 2901.05(C)(2), (3). [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 5:03 pm
The restatement does not specify the seller’s role in the chain of distribution or the extent of a particular seller’s control over the product. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 6:33 pm
The restatement does not specify the seller’s role in the chain of distribution or the extent of a particular seller’s control over the product. [read post]
24 Dec 2008, 6:10 pm
ROLAND D. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 11:23 am
SC08-992, SC08-1979, and SC08-2000.At 4:45 PM on November 7th, the Florida Supreme Court hadissued its forty-three page opinion denying Mr. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 11:30 am
" There is no claim of fraud or mistake in the wording or adoption of the operating agreements, and "[a]bsent some indicia of fraud or other circumstance warranting equitable intervention, it is the duty of a court to enforce rather than reform the bargain struck" (Grace v Nappa, 46 NY2d 560, 565 [1979]). [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 3:48 pm
NYM Co. of California, Inc., 595 F.2d 1194, 1200 (9th Cir. 1979). [read post]
27 Jul 2008, 3:27 pm
S. 256, 259 (1979) ("Admiralty law is judge-made law to a great extent"); Romero v. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 12:56 pm
It's been said that the third time's the charm. [read post]
8 May 2008, 12:01 pm
Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 547 (1979). [read post]
18 Jan 2008, 2:26 pm
Law Judge Bruce D. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 4:52 pm
" (In re Marriage of Fink (1979) 25 Cal.3d 877, 887.) [read post]
10 Nov 2007, 10:07 pm
Ralph Baze and Thomas C. [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 6:16 pm
In connection with counts 3 through 5, appellant admitted suffering two prior drunk driving convictions within the meaning of section 23566, subdivisions (b) and (c) and Penal Code section 191.5, subdivision (d). [read post]
