Search for: "Times-Review" Results 4901 - 4920 of 183,066
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2016, 11:51 am by Joel R. Brandes
Petitioner given time to submit evidence going to the necessity and reasonableness of the hours worked by her counsel, including submission of an unredacted itemized billing record for in camera review, her counsels claimed hourly rates, and the asserted research expenses. [read post]
24 Aug 2020, 9:24 am
" The first is a petition for writ of mandate or prohibition (an interlocutory appellate challenge to a trial court order any time before judgment) that requests a temporary stay during the period of time while the appellate court reviews the petition, and the temporary stay must issue within a week or so or it will be too late because something irreversible will have occurred. [read post]
8 Jan 2017, 9:00 pm by Doug Austin
  Time for our annual review of eDiscovery case law! [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 11:27 am by Jane Chong
Today the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announced that it is launching a review of allegations regarding actions by the Department of Justice and the FBI in the runup to the 2016 election. [read post]
23 Apr 2018, 12:47 pm
  No reason to grant review if you're just going to affirm a relatively insignificant opinion below.So I'd guess it didn't take up all that much of the Court's time. [read post]
1 Aug 2013, 8:23 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Anyone desiring a copy of this case to review may click this LINK. [read post]
13 Mar 2013, 5:32 am
Well, rather than seek en banc review (a review of the 3-judge panel decision by the entire DC Circuit), the NLRB has announced it will take its case straight to the Supreme Court. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 8:26 am
Victims of these incidents may be left waiting for weeks or even months as all the data is reviewed, and in that time, these victims may need medical help for any injuries they sustained. [read post]
30 Nov 2014, 8:56 pm by Kurt T. Koehler
The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article about the length of time that recent Supreme Court cases from the last five years were pending by the time they reached the apex court. [read post]
15 Jan 2024, 12:00 am
Over time as assets grow in value, the costs to repair or replace them also grows. [read post]
18 Apr 2023, 11:30 pm by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
 Key reforms includeIncreasing notice of the hospital review committee meeting from 48-hours to 7-daysIncreasing the transfer time from 10-days to 30-daysProhibiting the hospital review committee from basing its decision on certain groundsRequiring the hospital to provide the surrogate more information about the processAdding a reporting requirement, so there is data on how the law is being usedThe session ends May 29, 2023. [read post]
9 Dec 2022, 5:00 am
After reviewing the record before it, the court held that the Plaintiffs’ malpractice claims were time-barred since the Plaintiff first knew or should have known that they had been allegedly injured by allegedly erroneously legal advice back in 2004. [read post]
30 Apr 2018, 3:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
 Anyone wishing to review this decision, may click this LINK. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 1:30 pm by Joe Patrice
Looks like a certain judge is going to have a hard time leaving PDX next time. [read post]
13 May 2014, 6:31 am
Additional, special episodes will also be released from time to time to address a range of topical issues. [read post]
9 May 2019, 5:15 am by Steve Brachmann
If passed, the CASE Act would create the Copyright Claims Board, which is served by three full-time officers and two full-time attorneys who are appointed by the Register of Copyrights. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 8:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
  Anyone wishing to review the Riley opinion may click this LINK. [read post]
26 Jul 2024, 12:00 am
This article will review four considerations that can aid in this big decision. [read post]
12 Jun 2010, 11:02 am by Oliver G. Randl
[5] The Petitioner argues in essence, that he had not been given a reasonable chance to realise in time, i.e. before the Board of Appeal took the decision under review, the relevance which the Board attributed to Attachment A, so that he was not able to comment on it as it is his right pursuant to A 113(1). [read post]