Search for: "Doe VI "
Results 4641 - 4660
of 5,624
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Oct 2010, 10:26 am
The government may by statute impose many conditions on the use of government funds — that’s what Congress did with Title VI and Title IX (which generally bar recipients of federal funds from discriminating based on race and sex). [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 9:58 am
Nor does it provide for or contemplate admissions. [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 8:38 am
§ 14-3-409(b)(vi). [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 3:18 am
Unless a Taylor Law agreement requires some administrative hearing, administrative due process does not require that the municipality hold a hearing prior to its issuing its return to work order.3. [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 3:00 am
Fernando Muñoz LeonHow does law confront non-legal expectations? [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 12:55 pm
Hmmm, if the IRS doesn’t get you, the federal Privacy Commissioner does. [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 9:11 am
The court, after his arrest, ordered GS’s DNA be taken under Criminal Rule 4.7(b)(2)(vi). [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 1:24 pm
The Court does not accept the assertion from Plaintiffs that the only way to insure a list of cases that can be ready for trial is to let them control the list. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 10:50 am
Or as the Court has put it: “The question of the constitutionality of action taken by Congress does not depend on recitals of the power which it undertakes to exercise. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 4:28 am
Each of these rights is, more or less, a right that is good against the world and the validity of each does not depend upon any particular issue of personal trust between parties vis-à-vis such IP right. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 12:48 pm
Withdrawing support and advice does not create insight, does not lift the fog of emotion and hurt, does not enhance the ability to make sensible decisions. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 1:41 am
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22.9.2010 THE HONOURABLE MR. [read post]
16 Oct 2010, 5:23 pm
This was confirmed in the subsequent case of Vitrenko v Ukraine Decision of 15 December 2008 in which it was said that “the Court bears in mind the positive obligation on the State to ensure that persons subjected to defamation have a reasonable opportunity to exercise their right to reply by submitting a response to defamatory information in the same manner as it was disseminated” As a result, it is arguable that Article 10 does require the provision of a… [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 1:41 pm
Finally, counts V and VI involve challenges to two additional provisions in the law. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 8:11 pm
" Rather, Riddell characterizes the motion as an attempt by Schutt to "gag Riddell in its communications to existing and potential customers of both Schutt and Riddell" and asserts that the automatic stay "does not prevent a debtor's competitor from attempting to sell its products in part by referring to [the potential consequences of a bankruptcy filing] in a light less flattering than the light chosen by the debtor in its press releases, court filings, and… [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 10:55 am
VI. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 6:44 am
A family office is a company (including its directors, partners, trustees, and employees acting within the scope of their position or employment) that: (1) Has no clients other than family clients; provided that if a person that is not a family client becomes a client of the family office as a result of the death of a family member or key employee or other involuntary transfer from a family member or key employee, that person shall be deemed to be a family client for purposes of this section… [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 12:46 pm
It is said that this is an interim measure taken in light of the current position vis a vis the successful Judicial Review of the Legal Services Commission Family Contracts Tender. [read post]
11 Oct 2010, 11:20 pm
And I’m not sure how having a clause in the tenancy agreement can help you (vis a vis the person who owns the breached copyright), if you really are liable for your tenant’s action. [read post]
10 Oct 2010, 10:39 am
What it does: Provides that that no one can be compelled to give evidence against him or herself in a criminal prosecution. [read post]
