Search for: "MATTER OF B T B"
Results 3301 - 3320
of 20,070
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 May 2014, 5:55 pm
It doesn’t matter if that other provision is one known as Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act, one known as Section 4(i) of the Communications Act, or one known as Mary Poppins. [read post]
28 Sep 2010, 1:43 pm
But A says that B can't do that; that any claims against B must be filed in A's "site" (Belarus) in a separate arbitration proceeding.Who's right? [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 10:39 am
As an initial matter, the Court held that Rule 23(b)(2) presumptively does not apply to claims for monetary remedies, even if they are equitable in nature. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 8:11 am
Her focus: protectable subject matter. [read post]
21 Aug 2023, 4:00 am
I explained in my Friday post that while step (b) for removal overlaps substantially with the substantive immunity question, step (b) sets a lower threshold. [read post]
27 Jan 2020, 2:17 pm
(a) What matters are beliefs about the law’s relevance to the process, (b) the degree to which individuals hold those beliefs varies from one person to another (and in particular, Senators and members of the House vary in the extent to which they hold that belief), and (c) the degree to which law is believed to matter varies over time. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 9:13 am
And while of course we won’t precisely know this in any real world example, at least it gives us a useful framework for thinking about the proper design of a pollution tax.In the case of inequality, we don’t know which types matter the most, whether the marginal harm rises in any sort of continuous fashion, or really anything about how best to price it. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 10:13 pm
Trademark disputes aren’t usually appropriate for being decided on summary judgment. [read post]
10th Circuit Rules That Mortgage Borrowers Cannot Sue to Rescind After Three Years - No Matter What!
3 Jul 2012, 9:07 am
In support of this argument, plaintiff sought to characterize rescission under TILA as a non-judicial remedy, pointing to the provision in Regulation Z that states that “[t]o exercise the right to rescind, the consumer shall notify the creditor of the rescission by mail, telegram or other means of written communication,” 12 C.F.R. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 9:58 am
Section 2705(b) of Title 18of the U.S. [read post]
2 Mar 2012, 12:56 pm
You may also be somewhat distracted by client B’s problem or what needs to be done next for client B while you are working on the contract for client A – so does that time ‘count’ for client A, or client B? [read post]
15 Aug 2022, 3:23 pm
The order follows an oral argument that took place last Wednesday at the Richard B. [read post]
30 Mar 2021, 3:48 am
If not, the time couldn’t be better. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 4:04 pm
The editors’ decision on all matters relating to the quiz is, as usual, final. [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 8:25 am
The editors’ decision on all matters relating to the quiz is, as usual, final. [read post]
14 May 2015, 7:04 pm
” Section 213.0(5).The draft purports to preserve mens rea as an element of the offense, but that is no comfort because it is proven with barely an effort from the prosecutor: “Person A, When walking down the street side by side with your date, you knew, or knew of the risk, that Person B had not expressed prior positive agreement that you could reach out and hold B’s hand, didn’t you? [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 7:07 am
First, Federal Rule of Evidence 611(b) limits cross-examination “to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. [read post]
8 May 2018, 10:08 am
I don’t actually know the particular specifics of the Defendant’s case, but it is likely a similar reason, if not the exact one, for there being two trials. [read post]
8 May 2018, 10:08 am
I don’t actually know the particular specifics of the Defendant’s case, but it is likely a similar reason, if not the exact one, for there being two trials. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 1:04 pm
In determining whether [N.J.R.E.] 404(b) evidence bears on a material issue, the Court should consider whether the matter was projected by the defense as arguable before trial, raised by the defense at trial, or was one that the defense refused to concede. [read post]
