Search for: "Does 1-39"
Results 2281 - 2300
of 5,128
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Aug 2018, 8:29 am
This relationship is important, although it does not always hold true. [read post]
21 Apr 2008, 4:55 am
Yes it does, but after the first one it becomes much easier. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 9:40 am
This relationship is important, although it does not always hold true. [read post]
21 Mar 2016, 4:58 pm
However, unlike the AML, this provision of the revised AUCL does not include the possibility of mitigation of penalties. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 1:51 pm
CONCLUSION: These results provide evidence that the risk of idiopathic VTE in users of the patch is not materially different than that of users of levonorgestrel-containing OCs in women aged 39 years or younger. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 9:01 am
LEXIS 67813, at *39–40 (W.D. [read post]
16 Oct 2016, 4:00 am
And, there is nothing here that would meet the high threshold of s. 1 jursidiction. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 10:39 am
PS: I have several other keyword ad cases to blog, including 1-800 Contacts, Consumerinfo.com and Binder. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 12:38 pm
," and the information still had not been passed on by the time the plane departed at 7:39. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 9:48 am
Numbering for the footnotes for each individual section begins with 1. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 9:13 pm
The District Court does not even quote this passage. [read post]
28 May 2015, 7:49 am
On May 19, Connecticut’s Governor added the Nutmeg state to the list, signing S.B. 426 into law, becoming effective October 1, 2015. [read post]
22 Jul 2024, 9:56 am
That a term refers to a historical fact does not necessarily mean that only the older generations are aware of its meaning, especially among a specialist public (para 64). [read post]
22 Jul 2024, 9:56 am
That a term refers to a historical fact does not necessarily mean that only the older generations are aware of its meaning, especially among a specialist public (para 64). [read post]
10 Jan 2019, 8:27 am
Section 32 should be amended to clarify that section 32(2) does not relieve an employer of the obligation to ensure meal breaks are provided as required by section 32(1), and applies when it is necessary to interrupt a meal break because of an emergency or other exceptional circumstance. [read post]
10 Jan 2019, 8:27 am
Section 32 should be amended to clarify that section 32(2) does not relieve an employer of the obligation to ensure meal breaks are provided as required by section 32(1), and applies when it is necessary to interrupt a meal break because of an emergency or other exceptional circumstance. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 2:06 am
A woman's chance of being diagnosed with breast cancer is: .43% (often expressed as "1 in 233") from 30 through 39 1.45% (often expressed as "1 in 69") from 40 through 49 2.38% (often expressed as "1 in 42") from 50 through 59 3.45% (often expressed as "1 in 29") from 60 through 69 So the "1 in 8" chance of getting breast cancer is misleading, scary and unhelpful in telling people what… [read post]
25 Aug 2008, 3:24 am
It is a case of a coach imposing a new offense on a team for which he does (yet) not have the right personnel. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 3:36 pm
Cas. at 26.In his opening brief, Donald Trump appeared to preserve this argument, though just barely: He didn’t devote any space to it.[1] His reply brief does even less with it than that, offering only the ambiguous sentence “that section 3 may be enforced only though the congressionally enacted methods of enforcement,” without even arguing that Chief Justice Chase got it right in Griffin’s Case. [read post]
30 Jan 2018, 7:11 am
However, a voluntarily recognized union must still have the support of a majority of employees. 1. [read post]
