Search for: "In the Matter of Amendments to Rules 1 and 10"
Results 2521 - 2540
of 5,508
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jun 2023, 8:54 pm
Kaye explained that Article 13(1)(b) is most widely used in such cases. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 12:12 pm
At 10 a.m. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 1:46 am
The references, made under s 33(1) of the Scotland Act 1998, required the court to determine whether certain provisions in each of the Bills (namely ss 6, 19(2)(a)(ii), 20(10)(a)(ii) and 21(5)(b)(ii) of the UNCRC Bill and ss 4(1A) and 5(1) of the ECLSG Bill) were within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. [read post]
26 Sep 2023, 9:01 pm
Prior to this ruling, the Second Circuit had sought guidance from the SEC on the issue, but the SEC declined to provide an opinion on the matter.[3] The case has been closely watched because a pronouncement by the SEC that syndicated loans were securities or a decision to that effect by the Court could have led to significant uncertainty and market disruption in the syndicated loan market, and could have encouraged similar suits against other arrangers. [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 6:04 pm
But the true nerderati know that what really matters are the relists. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 8:06 am
As I explained in an earlier post, the “plain view doctrine” is a rule that can expand the scope of a lawful 4th Amendment intrusion into a private area. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 3:23 pm
A complex maze of ERISA, tax and other rules make the establishment, administration and termination of employee benefit plans a complicated matter. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 12:39 pm
As discussed here, on Friday, February 10, 2012, the U.S. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 10:00 am
" # # # Decided on October 22, 2009 No. 131 [*1]Amy L. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 12:30 pm
No matter that he chose not to. [read post]
3 Jul 2022, 6:50 pm
The North Carolina Supreme Court ruled for the employees. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 5:31 pm
Mar. 10, 2010). [read post]
28 Oct 2016, 7:12 am
Arbitration Prohibition – The new rule and guidance prohibits companies awarded federal contracts valued at over $1 million from requiring workers to enter into pre-dispute arbitration agreements regarding claims that involve sexual harassment, sexual assault, or violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. [read post]
23 Sep 2008, 12:03 pm
The appellate court rejected the claim because (1) Mark “had an opportunity to litigate the same matter in a former action,” which is all California law requires, see id., at 9-10, and (2) the fee-splitting agreement cannot be separated from the request for an award of attorney fees in the class action lawsuit, see id., at 10-11. [read post]
29 Dec 2015, 10:13 am
She paid the RTI application fee of Rs. 10/- using an Indian Postal Order (IPO). [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 7:44 am
Wideman (relisted after the October 5, 12, and 26 Conferences) Docket: 12-168 Issue(s): (1) Did the Fourth Circuit err when it rejected the rule of Buckhannon Board and Care Home, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2013, 10:50 am
Grace Fleeman, Senior Technical Reviewer, Branch 1, (Associate Chief Counsel International)), Internal Revenue Service, U.S. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 3:00 am
Link: Read The Decision Justice Antonin Scalia said in an 8-1 majority opinion that “an employer is surely entitled to have, for example, a no-headwear policy as an ordinary matter. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 2:08 pm
District Court originally dismissed the complaint and denied plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration for leave to amend. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 12:55 pm
§ 1125(c)(3)(C), thus barring as a matter of law a claim of dilution by tarnishment under the Lanham Act. [read post]
