Search for: "People v. Regules fn. 1"
Results 21 - 35
of 35
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Apr 2013, 11:53 pm
“The troubling part of the entire pink slime fiasco– which we believe is unsavory, but generally not unsafe– is that no one outside the industry seemed to know what was going into burgers; not the consumers who were buying them or the agency that regulates them,” said Klein in an email. [read post]
2 Nov 2012, 7:39 am
” Ward v. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 6:50 am
Harris v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:20 pm
Coito v. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 4:00 am
In Golan v. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 12:22 am
In Dugal v. [read post]
9 Oct 2011, 12:14 pm
There was no evidence that the emission levels from the refinery contravened any regulations. [read post]
18 Aug 2011, 10:48 am
(See Melone v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 11:08 pm
” [fn. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 11:07 am
Yes.Otherwise the statute would be a dead letter.1 All further undesignated statutory references will be to the Civil Code. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 5:03 pm
On appeal, the DMV contends (1) the trial court erred by concluding the officer's [***2] observation of Manriquez did not comply with the regulation; and (2) even if the officer did not comply, Manriquez did not establish the violation resulted in an inaccurate test result. 1 Regulation 1219.3 provides: "A breath sample shall be expired breath which is essentially alveolar in composition. [read post]
5 Mar 2010, 7:22 am
Corp. v. [read post]
3 Nov 2008, 7:50 pm
- Wyeth v. [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 2:00 pm
(Id. at p. 217, fn. 15.) [read post]
19 Mar 2008, 6:11 am
This post focuses on the limitations that the ADA imposes on such testing, and concludes that the Seventh Circuit’s approach to the issue in Karraker v. [read post]
