Search for: "State v. T. L. D." Results 2921 - 2940 of 4,189
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Apr 2014, 10:14 am by Lyle Denniston
On Monday, a lawyer for Argentina, Jonathan L. [read post]
31 Mar 2008, 9:43 am
" What about the end of independent S&L regulation? [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 6:00 pm
§ 101 rejections of software-based method claims in light of In re Bilski (FoundPersuasive) US Patents – Decisions District Court E D Texas: Computerised business method patent fails Bilski test under 35 USC 101: H&R Block Tax Services v Jackson Hewitt Tax Services Inc (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Patently-O) District Court N D Illinois: Internet archive website is admissible evidence in touchscreen keyboard patent case: SP Techs, LLC v… [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 9:27 am by Joel R. Brandes
–––Jasmine D.], 165 A.D.3d 476, 85 N.Y.S.3d 430 [1st Dept. 2018]). [read post]
14 Jul 2016, 5:16 am by Schachtman
Div., 1st Dep’t June 6, 2013); “A Cautionary Tale on How Not to Sponsor a Scientific Study for Litigation” (June 21, 2013). [2] LoGiudice v. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 7:54 am by Sasha Volokh
The case is being heard today before Judges Carolyn Dineen King, Stuart Kyle Duncan, and Kurt D. [read post]
20 Jul 2020, 11:01 am by Jon L. Gelman
Our phased reopening in conditions where case incidence remains high ensures a long and slow recovery, not a V-shaped recovery. [read post]
27 Nov 2021, 6:26 am by Joel R. Brandes
” She further alleged that “[t]he parties have not specifically agreed otherwise in a validly executed agreement or stipulation and three years have passed since the order was entered, last modified or adjusted. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 4:00 am by Devlin Hartline
Most, if not all, states have theft laws that substantially track the Model Penal Code. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 7:47 am by Joel R. Brandes
Bank National Association v Langner, 168 AD3d 1021 [2d Dept 2019])” The Court observed that CPLR § 2309 sets forth the way oaths and affirmations are to be administered and notes in section (c) regarding oaths and affirmations taken without the state: An oath or affirmation taken without the state shall be treated as if taken within the state if it is accompanied by such certificate or certificates as would be required to entitle a deed acknowledged… [read post]