Search for: "Does 1-41" Results 3701 - 3720 of 4,619
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jan 2007, 11:17 am
(b) Table of Contents- The table of contents of this Act is as follows:Sec. 1. [read post]
12 May 2023, 12:41 pm
   One City, Two Legal Systems: Hong Kong Judges’ Role in Rights Violations under the National Security Law May 10, 2023 Introduction (PDF) Since the National People’s Congress Standing Committee of the People’s Republic of China imposed the National Security Law[1] on Hong Kong three years ago, authorities have used it to crack down on … [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
During my recent visit to Columbia Law School, Professor John Coffee shared with me a draft of a short article that later appeared in the New York Law Journal.[1] Coffee’s article assessed the prospects in the U.S. [read post]
28 Feb 2020, 12:28 pm by Benjamin Wittes, Jacob Schulz
It does label some accounts run by normal human users as trollbots. [read post]
3 Feb 2008, 10:42 pm
"[1] It is this distinction which also divides the opinions of Stephen Bainbridge, Margaret Blair and Lynn Stout on one side from those of Lucian Bebchuk. [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 6:55 am by Kristy Parker
The relevant rule (DC Circuit Rule 41(a)(1)) says that the court’s mandate must issue 7 days after the time for asking for rehearing (either by the judges who heard the appeal or the full court) expires and, if filed, 7 days after the petition for rehearing is denied. [read post]
31 Jul 2011, 9:00 am by The Legal Blog
(The proviso to Section 41 and Section 3 of Arbitration Act illustrate this point). [read post]
24 Dec 2011, 9:25 am
 (1-A) Where the Court grants an interim order under sub-section (1), it shall forthwith cause a notice being not less than seven days notice, together with a copy of such order to be served on the Public Prosecutor and the Superintendent of Police, with a view to give the Public Prosecutor a reasonable opportunity of being heard when the application shall be finally heard by the Court. [read post]
27 Jun 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
”[43] But section 14(a) does not specifically preempt state corporate law or even specifically mention shareholder proposals. [read post]
16 Nov 2012, 1:50 pm by Bexis
 . and does not play an integral and vital part in the overall production or marketing of [products]”); Shepard v. [read post]