Search for: "Does 1 - 41" Results 3641 - 3660 of 4,702
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jan 2011, 1:28 pm by Jim Eagar
  Without these changes, any amount over $1 million passed at death was taxed at a starting rate of 41% and could rise to a rate as high as 60%. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 11:11 am by The Legal Blog
It was argued that in contrast to Sections 4 and 6, Section 48(1) of the Act does not contemplate issue of any notification and withdrawal from the acquisition can be done by an order simpliciter. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 11:25 am by Tana Fye
              The existing Indian family exception is a judicially created doctrine holding that the ICWA does not apply to those Indian children who have never been a member of an Indian home or culture and probably never would be.[14]  Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians[15], many states adopted the existing Indian family exception. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 11:25 am by Tana Fye
              The existing Indian family exception is a judicially created doctrine holding that the ICWA does not apply to those Indian children who have never been a member of an Indian home or culture and probably never would be.[14]  Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians[15], many states adopted the existing Indian family exception. [read post]
22 Jan 2011, 5:00 am
This report leaves more questions than it does provide answers. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 9:06 am by Rebecca Tushnet
"), 19% of the test group answered "yes," as did 41% of the control group. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 8:56 am by WSLL
§ 41-3-613 was contrary to law? [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 1:27 am by Adam Wagner
 This is far wider than Hirst (No. 2), and whilst it is not technically binding on the UK, it does provide a clue as to what would happen if either of the government’s recent proposals – limiting the vote to either 1 or 4 year serving prisoners – would be received in the European Court. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 3:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
” (T 41/82 [1])Should you wish to download the whole decision, just click here.To have a look at the file wrapper, click here.NB: This decision was also reported here. [read post]
17 Jan 2011, 11:48 am by John L. Welch
" Decision as PrecedentialPrededential No. 34: TTAB Affirms Refusal to Register "Beer Glass and Stand" Packaging for Lack of Distinctiveness Fraud: Precedential No. 36: TTAB Refuses to Find Fraudulent Intent Where Applicant Relied on Advice of CounselPrecedential No. 16: Fraud Claim Survives Motion to Dismiss; Facts Pleaded with Sufficient ParticularityPrecedential No. 2: TTAB Okays Fraud Pleading But Denies Summary Judgment on Intent Issue Genericness: Precedential No. 45: TTAB Finds… [read post]
17 Jan 2011, 3:00 am by Peter A. Mahler
  The appellate court's decision reversing Justice Lebous's order does not address the latter's stated goal of judicial economy, but it does make short work of his two other rationales. [read post]
16 Jan 2011, 8:18 pm by Durga Rao
In our view, that by itself does not throw any light on the scope of section 41 of the Act. [read post]
16 Jan 2011, 11:36 am by Steve Bainbridge
” No dictionary we have examined defines “device” to encompass an animal, and section 41-6-1 uses the word “device” in its usual sense. [read post]
15 Jan 2011, 11:08 am by Tana Fye
  Those states were Alaska[1], Arizona[2], Idaho[3], Michigan[4], New York[5], North Dakota[6], and Utah[7]. [read post]