Search for: "Does 1 - 41"
Results 3661 - 3680
of 4,702
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jan 2011, 11:08 am
Those states were Alaska[1], Arizona[2], Idaho[3], Michigan[4], New York[5], North Dakota[6], and Utah[7]. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 3:32 pm
” In re Epic Holdings, Inc., 985 S.W.2d 41, 51 (Tex. 1998) (emphasis added) (citing Texaco, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 10:50 am
Pp. 41–44. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 9:21 am
Nota Bene Note 1: In obiter dicta Iacobucci J observed that the tender documents being considered in the case themselves illustrated the “rationale for the tendering process . . . to replace negotiation with competition” (para 41). [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 9:21 am
Nota Bene Note 1: In obiter dicta Iacobucci J observed that the tender documents being considered in the case themselves illustrated the “rationale for the tendering process . . . to replace negotiation with competition” (para 41). [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:06 pm
Held: 1. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:06 pm
" Held: 1. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:06 pm
" Held: 1. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 12:08 pm
So, what does it matter? [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 11:08 am
’s father, a member of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.[36] Six years after the divorce, the birth mother arranged for an adoption of D.M.J. by a non-Indian married couple.[37] Adoption proceedings began; and the birth father and the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma appeared at the hearing to oppose the adoption.[38] The trial court terminated the birth father’s parental rights for nonsupport of D.M.J.; and D.M.J. was adopted by the married couple.[39] The father… [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 11:08 am
’s father, a member of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.[36] Six years after the divorce, the birth mother arranged for an adoption of D.M.J. by a non-Indian married couple.[37] Adoption proceedings began; and the birth father and the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma appeared at the hearing to oppose the adoption.[38] The trial court terminated the birth father’s parental rights for nonsupport of D.M.J.; and D.M.J. was adopted by the married couple.[39] The father… [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:16 am
Mr Eadie made four final submissions: 1. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 1:17 am
The controversy raises important public policy concerns that have generated heated debate” (para 41), but then declared that “Those difficult and important questions are not the focus of this proceeding and cannot and should not be resolved in this forum” (para 41). [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 11:56 pm
SIR MICHAEL PARKINSON v ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS LTD 3/3/2010 41. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 6:08 pm
LEXIS 129; 41 N.M. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 1:21 pm
See Rule 56.01(b)(1). [read post]
8 Jan 2011, 10:20 am
Section 22 of the Ontario Employment Standards Act provides that in most circumstance, an employee who works more than 44 hours in a given week shall be paid at least one and one-half times his or her regular rate of pay for overtime hours worked.Specifically, Section 22 of the Act states:Overtime threshold22. (1) An employer shall pay an employee overtime pay of at least one and one-half times his or her regular rate for each hour of work in excess of 44 hours in each week or, if another… [read post]
6 Jan 2011, 2:30 pm
Code Ann. 79–29–1007(1). [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 10:19 am
See Authority to Delay a Project Does Not Make the Project Discretionary. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 3:01 pm
The evidence provided with the statement of grounds of appeal with respect to distinctions between endodontic procedures and the treatment of dental caries does not reveal any differences that are reflected in the wording of claim 1 in suit. [read post]
