Search for: "Does 1 - 23"
Results 501 - 520
of 15,304
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Mar 2010, 10:23 am
LEXIS 35 (March 23, 2010)*: After careful and independent review of the record, mindful that we must view the trial justice's findings of fact through a prism of deference, it is our opinion that Ms. [read post]
9 Feb 2007, 1:49 am
" Appellant does not contest the district court's findings that the first two elements of subsection (iii) were satisfied. [read post]
27 Jul 2012, 9:37 am
Trial courts have the means available under other rules to respond to a litigant’s willfully contumacious failure to comply with an order, Rules 1:1-1 and -2, and to impose sanctions for the failure to comply with an order for discovery, Rule 4:23-2. [read post]
12 May 2022, 7:02 pm
Under the Hague Protocol of 23 November 2007 on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations, maintenance obligations are governed by the law of the State of habitual residence of the creditor, save where the Protocol itself provides otherwise [Article 3(1)]. [read post]
23 Nov 2007, 10:08 am
See IC 33-23-6-2(b). [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 4:12 am
Pete Lund (R-36th District) on April 23, 2013. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 6:49 am
LEXIS 700 (July 23, 2009): Our consideration of the factors leads us to conclude that defendant lacked a legitimate expectation of privacy in the purse. [read post]
1 Sep 2007, 8:39 am
LEXIS 166 (August 23, 2007): P15 However, the fact that Allen sought to hide the damage to his vehicle by using a car cover does not determine whether he had an objectively legitimate expectation of privacy in the exterior appearance of his car. [read post]
17 Mar 2023, 1:53 am
This just landed in my inbox at 1:00 AM from Trader’s Joe. [read post]
17 Jan 2015, 5:20 am
Nor does skewing the questions, and the various other flaws noted in her story. [read post]
4 Jan 2007, 8:26 pm
JOHN DOE, Defendant.Case Number: O-2004-1175COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA2006 OK CR 1; 127 P.3d 1135; 2006 Okla. [read post]
22 Oct 2007, 5:25 am
But Rule 23(f) does not allow interlocutory appeals from orders designating (or not designating) lead plaintiffs-and although 28 U.S.C. [read post]
25 Oct 2022, 6:00 am
Phase 4—Virtual Rounds We will hold the Virtual Rounds over Zoom: 2/13/23 and 2/15/23: Semifinal Round 2/27/23 and 4/1/23: Round of 8 3/27/23 and 3/29/23: Round of 4 The virtual rounds will be scored based on this rubric. [read post]
17 Apr 2009, 12:34 pm
" (See Part 16 of 23.) [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 2:16 pm
Rule 23(c)(2)(B) requires “reasonable effort,” but when does ensuring individual notice become “unreasonable”? [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 1:00 am
This will be heard in Courtroom 1. [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 9:47 am
Novelty (Article 100(a) and Article 54(1) EPC)Document (1) does not provide a direct and unambiguous disclosure of the feature of intramuscular injection and is thus not novelty-destroying for the subject-matter of claim 1.(...)5. [read post]
15 Jan 2009, 12:47 pm
Who does that leave? [read post]
23 Oct 2020, 3:00 am
But while the OSC sometimes makes Hatch Act findings, the Justice Department rarely does, said David Gergen, a professor of public service at the Harvard Kennedy School. [read post]
25 Apr 2009, 6:38 pm
(See Part 8 of 23.) [read post]
