Search for: "Does 1-54"
Results 2181 - 2200
of 3,413
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Sep 2012, 4:04 am
Essentially, the Federal Government has granted ‘reservation status’ to a 54-acre plot in the same town, where the Tohono O’odham Nation plans to build a resort and casino. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 5:54 pm
Cheatham, 54 A.D.3d 297, 299, 863 N.Y.S.2d 407, 410 (1stDept 2008). [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 7:13 am
(para. 21) It then drew a distinction between two ways in which the “real and substantial connection” test had been used in the jurisprudence: (1) as a constitutional rule; and (2) as a conflict of laws rule. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 7:13 am
(para. 21) It then drew a distinction between two ways in which the “real and substantial connection” test had been used in the jurisprudence: (1) as a constitutional rule; and (2) as a conflict of laws rule. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 10:03 pm
The claimant who is now 54 years old, has a long history of drug abuse and a lengthy criminal history, consisting primarily of drug crime offenses. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 8:54 am
Out-of-pocket expenses does not include the cost of obtaining legal advice, or of retaining legal counsel. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 8:54 am
Out-of-pocket expenses does not include the cost of obtaining legal advice, or of retaining legal counsel. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 12:53 pm
The Tunney Act allows, but does not require, a court to conduct an evidentiary hearing. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 11:34 am
And did English domestic civil procedure comply with Article 6(1) of ECHR, and its EU equivalent, Article 47 of the Charter? [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 5:24 am
State, 152 S.W.3d 54, 59 (Texas Court of Appeals 2004). [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 11:29 am
David Egilman’s opinions.Order at 1-2. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 1:46 am
Our court of appeals has held that: Although Rule 54(d)(1) does create a presumption for awarding costs to prevailing parties, it also places on the losing party the burden to show why costs should not be awarded. . . . [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 6:22 pm
App. 4th 1559 [54 Cal. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 1:21 pm
Ct. 1937, 1953-54 (2009) (emphasis added). [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 10:00 am
N.J.S.A. 2A:34-54. [read post]
3 Sep 2012, 11:07 am
’” 780 So.2d at 54 (quoting First Nat. [read post]
2 Sep 2012, 10:18 am
Finally, the dispute in this case also relates to the public-policy clause in Article 34(1) of Regulation No 44/2001. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 6:27 am
Anthony Nitti, How Does a “Go Shop” Provision Impact the Treatment of Transaction Costs? [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 8:43 am
Kent State University, 212 F.3d 1272, 1282, 54 USPQ2d 1673, 1679 (Fed. [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 2:55 am
The judgment does not explain why Insight SRC did not pursue such a claim. [read post]
