Search for: "In re Martin (1981)" Results 21 - 40 of 132
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Aug 2007, 9:18 pm
"The real discovery of embryonic stem cells was by Martin Evans, Matt Kaufman, and Gail Martin in 1981, and none of these scientists considered patenting them," said Loring. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 7:01 am by Ashby Jones
” His obituaries, in both the NYT and LAT, are as interesting as you’re going to find for a courtroom lawyer. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 1:17 pm by D. Daxton White
In 1981, Apache Corporation was the first company to form an MLP in the United States. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 8:06 am by Jane Turner
In 1980-1981, when Gill was eight years old, her family moved to Phoenix. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 11:17 am by Ari Waldman
It’s funny because at that time (1981), there had been no Jews in space. [read post]
6 Nov 2012, 6:14 am
 See, e.g., In re Dinnan, 661 F.2d 426, 431–32 (5th Cir. 1981); D’Aurizio v. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 5:41 am by Steve Lombardi
Let me conclude by saying, no one offered me this opportunity when in 1981 I graduated from Drake Law School. [read post]
11 Apr 2012, 10:47 am by Jeff Gamso
" Then there's Martin, the one who survived.Lee Martin also plans to witness the execution. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 5:10 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
Grossbard, 87 N.J. 512 (1981).The difference between the res ipsa doctrine and the common knowledge doctrine is that the res ipsa doctrine requires expert testimony to prove the first element of proof, i.e., that the occurrence does not usually happen in the absence of negligence. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 5:11 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
Grossbard, 87 N.J. 512 (1981).The difference between the res ipsa doctrine and the common knowledge doctrine is that the res ipsa doctrine requires expert testimony to prove the first element of proof, i.e., that the occurrence does not usually happen in the absence of negligence. [read post]
16 Dec 2023, 10:22 am by Russell Knight
” In re Marriage of Komnick, 417 NE 2d 1305 – Ill: Supreme Court 1981 An Illinois divorce court should “order that this appreciation be equitably apportioned in its final judgment. [read post]