Search for: "Fair v. State" Results 4081 - 4100 of 27,807
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
Entities exempted from the Act include (i) agencies, commissions, districts, etc. of the state or political subdivisions, (ii) nonprofits, (iii) higher education, (iv) national securities associations, (v) financial institutions or data subject to Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), and (vi) hospitals as defined under Connecticut law. [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 1:13 pm
Sanderson, 715 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); State Dep’t. of Nat’l Res. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 6:49 am by MOTP
" The Parkers further alleged that IB owed them, as trust beneficiaries, a duty of fair dealing, which it breached by violating certain FINRA rules.[2] Specifically, IB failed to use "reasonable diligence" in the opening and maintenance of their trust account; know the "essential facts" concerning the trust, as its customer; "have a reasonable basis to believe that a recommended transaction or investment strategy involving a security or securities [was]… [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 12:24 am by Michael Geist
It continues by stating that: ESA's argument is also consistent with this Court's caution in Théberge v. [read post]
14 Jan 2016, 4:46 pm by GGCRBHS&M
While some are pleased with the progressive closings of developmental centers others believe that some patients are not fit for community based services and would fair better in an institution. [read post]
27 Aug 2021, 6:00 am by Terry Hart
Says — The court was asked to revisit the decision denying fair use to the Andy Warhol Foundation in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Google v. [read post]
2 Dec 2010, 12:51 pm by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.
The Maryland Court of Special Appeals decided on Thompson v. [read post]
2 Jun 2016, 11:47 am by Stefanie K. Vaudreuil
  On March 18, 2016, the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut decided Fabian v. [read post]
16 Oct 2017, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
In determining the breadth of the margin, a “fair balance” must be struck between rights under Articles 8 and 10 ECHR (Mosley v UK [2011] ECHR 774 [108]-[111]). [read post]