Search for: "DOES 1-44" Results 261 - 280 of 4,292
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Apr 2017, 2:40 am
This is essentially because the intervention needed to fall within the scope of Article 3(1) does not require to be strictly indispensable: mere facilitation seems enough. [read post]
26 Sep 2018, 6:55 am by Kevin Kaufman
Source: Tax Foundation Alabama 39 20 30 48 15 12 Alaska 2 25 1 5 23 35 Arizona 27 17 19 47 5 13 Arkansas 46 40 40 44 26 34 California 49 31 49 43 14 17 Colorado 18 16 14 38 12 40 Connecticut 47 29 43 30 50 23 Delaware 11 50 41 2 9 3 Florida 4 6 1 22 11 2 Georgia 33 8 38 29 24 38 Hawaii 38 14 47 24 16 26 Idaho 21 26 23 26 4 48 Illinois 36 39 13 36 45 42 Indiana 10 18 15 12 2 11 Iowa 45 48 42 19 39 33 Kansas 28 34 21 31 20 15 Kentucky 23 27 17 14 35 47 Louisiana 44… [read post]
14 Dec 2020, 5:26 pm by Tobias Lutzi
Seemingly seeking to align its decision with the one in Case C-105/17 Kamenova, where this factors had been considered, the Court qualifies it by holding that the claimant consumer does not lose this quality as long as they do not offer their services as a poker player for remuneration or formally register them. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 9:32 pm by V.Venkatesan
Here are some of the flaws, as I understand. 1. [read post]
12 Feb 2009, 2:04 pm
Hence the exclusion of arbitration, from its scope, 2) To say that the scope of Brussels I is only to be interpreted as far as the merits of a case are concerned (point 26) may be true for other exclusions of Article 1 of 44/2001, not for arbitration. [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 4:15 am
Therefore, the registration of the disputed trade mark fell within the scope of “other illegitimate means” prohibited in Article 44, Section 1 of the Chinese Trademark Law. [read post]
Please contact me if you would like more detail on these matters, or if you have other related questions. 1. [read post]
11 May 2011, 1:22 pm by G. Randolph Rice, Jr.
Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44, § 922 that pertains to the prohibition of possessing firearms in part states:Baltimore Criminal Lawyer410-288-2900(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—  (1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;  (2) who is a fugitive from justice;  (3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section… [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 5:07 pm by INFORRM
The claim pleaded in this case relied on harassment contrary to section 1(1) of the 1997 Protection from Harassment Act, which provides that a person must not “pursue a course of conduct (a) which amounts to harassment of another and (b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of another”. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 6:17 pm
By the time Swinkle's notice of appeal was filed with the trial court, it was 44 days late. [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 7:04 am by admin
Twitter barely registered with 2% and YouTube was fourth with a scant 1%. [read post]
24 Aug 2017, 1:11 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
LEXIS 16647 (MD Tenn 2010) answered this question in the negative:The defendant also describes many of the 21 topics, see Docket Entry No. 44-1, as relating to fact-intensive issues requiring the testimony of fact witnesses rather than a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of a corporate designee. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 12:06 pm by WSLL
We conclude thatAppellant’s claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata.Issues: Appellant presents the following issues: 1. [read post]
14 Jun 2021, 1:23 pm by Rebecca Jeschke
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed the law, set to take effect July 1, to punish social media companies for their speech moderation practices. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 9:47 pm
Oregon Public Broadcasting: Report: 286 Medical Mistakes Ended in Serious Injury or Death in Oregon Last Year Oregon Public Broadcasting: How Does Defensive Affect Health Care Costs [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 10:28 am
Remember, if your vehicle does not have a roof rack, tying a tree to the roof of your car is probably not a good idea. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 7:51 am
Kat light pink knees Is the answer to Question 1 the same if the alleged infringement of copyright results, not from the placing of dematerialised content online, but, as in the present case, from the online sale of a material carrier medium which reproduces that content? [read post]