Search for: "Does 1-39"
Results 4941 - 4960
of 5,131
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jun 2007, 4:28 pm
Webb responded that 1:1 is a floor, that he's aiming for 2:1 on the active side. . . . [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 4:00 pm
Superior Court (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 39 (holding that an individual's assignment of a cause of action to a third party does not carry with it the individual's statutory right to sue in a representative capacity under PAGA or the Unfair Competition Law at Business and Professions Code § 17203). [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 11:49 am
Code § 34-51-4-1. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 10:12 am
Compare ante, at 39 (history will be heard.), with Brewer v. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 6:38 am
Does that count as 1/2 or 1?) [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 2:57 am
" Id. col.4 ll. 39-42. [read post]
27 Jun 2007, 2:29 pm
The income he earns at the grocery store does not cover his expenses, which includes rent, a car payment and child support. [read post]
25 Jun 2007, 6:36 pm
And as I think it through, I think Yglesias is getting at a point, but does not articulate it -- to wit, Edwards is really primed to fully play the "outsider" role. [read post]
23 Jun 2007, 8:39 am
So what does all this mean in real dollars? [read post]
22 Jun 2007, 11:27 am
[which begins:] I must respectfully dissent from the majority's holding that: (1) the Defendants did not waive their argument that their failure to comply with the statutory procedure for setting the initial storm water user fees was excusable under the de minimis doctrine; and (2) the variance from the statutory procedure for setting the initial user fees was de minimis. * * * Therefore, I respectfully dissent from the majority's conclusion that any variance from the precise… [read post]
21 Jun 2007, 11:10 am
Supp. 2d 39 (D. [read post]
21 Jun 2007, 7:09 am
Christopher Slobogin (University of Florida - Levin College of Law) has posted Lying and Confessing (Texas Tech Law Review, Vol. 39, 2007) on SSRN. [read post]
21 Jun 2007, 6:00 am
Superior Court, 148 Cal.App.4th 39 (2007) (modified Mar. 22, 2007) (slip op. at 2). [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 5:18 pm
The underlying decision came on a 2-1 vote, as did the decision to deny rehearing. [read post]
19 Jun 2007, 9:07 am
For publication opinions today (1): In Marvin M. [read post]
13 Jun 2007, 12:39 pm
Christy at Firedoglake analyzes Fitzgerald's response here and here. [read post]
12 Jun 2007, 4:46 am
On the contrary, the comparison must be made by examining each of the marks in question as a whole, which does not mean that the overall impression conveyed to the relevant public by a composite trade mark may not, in certain circumstances, be dominated by one or more of its components (see order in Matratzen Concord v OHIM, paragraph 32; Medion, paragraph 29).42 As the Advocate General pointed out ..., it is only if all the other components of the mark are negligible that the assessment of… [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 9:28 am
He is the 39-year-old man who was befriended by employees at the Bexar County Courthouse. [read post]
10 Jun 2007, 10:25 am
Does that matter? [read post]
10 Jun 2007, 10:18 am
In fact, the Stros are not much better than the worst teams in all of Major League Baseball, the Rangers (23-39) and the Royals (23-40). [read post]
