Search for: "X, Y "
Results 2841 - 2860
of 4,307
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Feb 2021, 4:39 pm
Leading public health and workplace safety experts have urged the Biden Administration to invoke immediate measures to reduce the aerosol spread based COVID-19 virus. [read post]
13 Jul 2016, 4:04 pm
The Tribunal said that if it represents a claim of type X (of which more later), then that claim is unfounded. [read post]
5 May 2008, 6:05 am
And leverage: At some point, associates (particularly Gen X/Y) will say that the eye of the needle they're being expected to pass through is laughably small. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 4:05 pm
This rule was summarised in the following terms by May LJ in Shah v Standard Chartered Bank [1999] QB 241: “The repetition rule in its simplest application is that, if you publish a statement that Y said that X is guilty, it is not a defence to an action for defamation to establish the literal truth of the publication, ie that it is indeed true that Y said that X is guilty. [read post]
21 Aug 2023, 12:01 am
Y. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 8:41 am
This rule was summarised in the following terms by May LJ in Shah v Standard Chartered Bank [1999] QB 241: “The repetition rule in its simplest application is that, if you publish a statement that Y said that X is guilty, it is not a defence to an action for defamation to establish the literal truth of the publication, ie that it is indeed true that Y said that X is guilty. [read post]
9 Jun 2016, 7:38 am
Linkage problem when Y (context) needs X (usually protectable). [read post]
23 Aug 2019, 10:55 am
Weight Watchers Int’l, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 12:33 pm
Perhaps there isn’t and the problem is with the Officers in the Case misinterpreting what the CPS actually want from them (though I have to say that based on my experience and reading of many many police logs I’m pretty sure the police are sometimes TOLD by the CPS ‘you must have x,y,z before we’ll consider the case’). [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 12:42 pm
”Defendant: “Regulation X also allowed us to do B. [read post]
5 Jul 2020, 4:00 am
Le père a présenté une demande en habeas corpus, faisant valoir que la mère détenait X sans droit. [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 3:09 pm
My response was that I didn’t know whether that particular branch of the Chinese government charges a $15,000 fee for X but I very much doubted it. [read post]
27 Jun 2023, 11:13 am
These are fundamental capabilities that enable critical use cases for all parties in insurance[4], including the ability of a customer to better understand their coverage (what is my coverage if X happens) or of an insurer or a regulator to detect or simulate risk exposure or concentration at portfolio level. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 8:42 am
IALSO: YOU WILL PAY FOR YOUR LACK OF EXPERIENCE..... but maybe my experience can lessen the burden for some of you newer attorneys.Have fun out there y'all.-- R. [read post]
22 Mar 2015, 2:17 pm
(B) Driving while intoxicated, driving under the influence, and operating while impaired (§ 50‑2201.05); (C) A misdemeanor offense for which sex offender registration is required pursuant to Chapter 40 of Title 22, whether or not the registration period has expired; (D) Criminal abuse of a vulnerable adult (§ 22‑936(a)); (E) Interfering with access to a medical facility (§ 22‑1314.02); (F) Possession of a pistol by a convicted felon (§ 22‑4503(a)(2) [see… [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 9:43 am
But there's a part of me that responds: "Well, sure, but at least when I end up on the wrong side of an ambiguous statute, I can read the thing as well as anyone else, and go to a lawyer who can look at all the facts and says that it more likely will be interpreted to mean X instead of Y. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 3:31 pm
The decision is Aereo's first major defeat in court, although Aereo look-alike FilmOn X already has two preliminary injunctions against it. [read post]
10 May 2015, 6:20 am
If you argue that X is inventive, then does that make Y insufficient? [read post]
8 Dec 2021, 8:46 am
Spinning up new policy proposals to push through the legislature, trying to ban technology x while strictly regulating technology y and promoting technology z is not going to work. [read post]
31 May 2016, 5:53 am
If country X says you must do action A on the Internet and it applies worldwide and country Y says you must NOT do action A on the Internet and it applies worldwide, how would that work? [read post]
