Search for: "DOES, 1-20" Results 4961 - 4980 of 27,653
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Aug 2008, 8:15 am
The 2007 ruling favored a 20-year-old student whose Tier 1 sex-offender status would have barred him from living at The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey in the Pomona section of the township. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 12:08 pm by Robert C. Weill
SC12-905 ( review granted July 20, 2012). [read post]
3 Dec 2008, 5:00 pm
  The reduction of salary and retainer to $1 does not address performance based compensation such as stock options. [read post]
18 Aug 2010, 8:00 am by Jennifer S. Taub
My broker does not charge me annually a marketing fee associated with that initial sale. [read post]
5 Sep 2011, 7:54 am by Holland & Hart
The final rule, which the NLRB adopted by a 3-1 vote (Member Brian E. [read post]
15 Aug 2020, 6:32 am by Alan White
” The Memorandum does not specify which loan categories (Direct, FFEL, Perkins, private) should be included, nor whether relief to borrowers in default should continue. [read post]
28 Dec 2019, 10:13 pm by Mary Mock
Does California get it right with any of these new laws? [read post]
1 Jul 2009, 10:31 am
Plaintiffs are unaware of the true names and capacities of those defendants sued herein as DOES 1-20. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 7:18 am by Chris Faiella
The Glasgow Coma Scale is obtained by assigning point values 1 through 4 regarding eye opening, 1 through 5 regarding verbal response, and 1 through 6 regarding best motor responses. [read post]
18 Feb 2008, 1:51 pm
Slashdot contains the following comment about Bilski:The following dialogue occurs at 15:20 of the mp3 file obtainable at: http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/oralarguments/searchscript.asp [uscourts.gov] (type Bilski for Caption)Judge 1: The way in which the Board . . . presented Bilski to us was with this prayer for guidance. . . . [read post]
3 Oct 2013, 4:12 pm by Aaron Barkoff
("the '086 action"), filed January 20, 2012 and served January 23, 2012). [read post]
21 Aug 2007, 9:35 am
Where you have (1) filed bankruptcy under Chapter 11 (IRC Sec. 108 (a)(1)(A)), or (2) are insolvent at the time of the discharge (IRC Sec. 108(a) (1) (B)), then IRC Sec. 61(a)(12) does not apply.The first exemption is easy - you either filed Chapter 11 or you haven't. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 11:59 am by Chris Cheatham
  Changes to the State Code were passed on November 20, 2009 and the new code went into effect July 1, 2010. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 8:49 am by Kathleen Claussen
To the extent it limits Canada’s rights, how far does that stretch? [read post]
13 Jun 2019, 1:06 pm
| Skykick - why does it matter & what could it mean for trade marks? [read post]
16 Jun 2019, 11:07 am
| Skykick - why does it matter & what could it mean for trade marks? [read post]