Search for: "DOES 2-25"
Results 5261 - 5280
of 16,502
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Sep 2017, 4:07 pm
For employers with at least 25 employees working in a given week,[2] the cap on accrual is 72 hours. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 11:31 am
The Court also informed Defendant that, if he did not comply with the articulated conditions, the Court would then sentence Defendant to 25 years. [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 6:53 am
As a result, minor subdivisions will remain Unlisted actions in the SEQRA regulations. 2. [read post]
23 May 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE 2 Extraditable Offenses 1. [read post]
4 Jul 2010, 9:52 pm
What on earth does a contingency fee where you still get conventional hourly rate costs from the other side achieve that a conditional fee agreement does not achieve? [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 12:58 pm
Employees who worked part-time as of February 25, 2020, are entitled to the average number of hours that the employee was scheduled to work over two (2) weeks during the six (6) month period prior to February 25, 2020. [read post]
14 Jun 2024, 1:51 am
This is because the Criminal Code does not use the terms ‘heritage’ or ‘monument’ in the articles related to cultural heritage[22] (Articles 205, 218, 219 and 222), as prescribed in the Cultural Heritage Protection Act (2008).[23] Therefore, the courts must determine the value in each case on a case-by-case basis and then decide on the penalty. [read post]
14 Jun 2024, 1:51 am
This is because the Criminal Code does not use the terms ‘heritage’ or ‘monument’ in the articles related to cultural heritage[22] (Articles 205, 218, 219 and 222), as prescribed in the Cultural Heritage Protection Act (2008).[23] Therefore, the courts must determine the value in each case on a case-by-case basis and then decide on the penalty. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 12:14 pm
(FDA Br. at 25.) [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 4:58 am
As it often does, the burden shift seems to matter in the result here. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 5:09 am
" Erie cross-moved for summary judgment, arguing that: (1) the loss was excluded because it was "caused by, resulting from, contributed to or aggravated by faulty or inadequate" workmanship, construction or materials used in construction; or (2) the Ewalds' loss was not an "ensuing loss". [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 4:11 pm
Armstrong then proceeds to argue that (1) the Sports Act does not apply to his claims; (2) even if the Sports Act did apply, it would not preempt his claims; (3) he is not required to exhaust administrative remedies; and (4) he did not agree to arbitrate his claims against USADA. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 7:47 pm
Debate on Section 3, Georgetown Federalist Society (10/25/23). [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 8:07 am
Raymond Corp., 340 F.3d 520, 524-25 (8th Cir. 2003); Dancy v. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 12:25 am
This year’s letter (here), released on February 25, 2012, does not disappoint. [read post]
28 Sep 2018, 11:42 am
President Donald Trump’s Sept. 25 speech to the U.N. [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 1:24 am
2. [read post]
11 Aug 2021, 3:21 pm
Whether a court engages with copyright limitations in the decision appears to make a big difference about who wins the case. 60% invoke some limitation; P wins 2/3 of the time when court doesn’t mention limitations; D wins 2/3 of the time when court does do so. [read post]
16 Jan 2019, 9:50 am
In the event of a hard sunset, the situation reverts to the status quo as it was all the way back on October 25, 2001—i.e. [read post]
6 Apr 2017, 1:35 pm
., 2012 WL 3234282,at *2 (N.D. [read post]
