Search for: "In re T. W."
Results 5781 - 5800
of 8,737
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Aug 2017, 8:37 am
According to the court in Beverage Holdings I, “Contracts are to be read, giving effect to every part of the agreement;…the intent of the parties is to be determined from the contract as a whole;” and while “extrinsic or parol evidence is admissible to explain an ambiguity or uncertainty arising out of the terms of a written instrument…[w]hen the terms in a contract are unambiguous, courts will not in effect create a new contract by finding an intent not… [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 10:00 am
Compounding the absurdity, the sole consequence of Trump’s anticipated step—Congressional action to re-impose the nuclear-related sanctions on Iran—appears highly unlikely. [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 8:37 am
According to the court in Beverage Holdings I, “Contracts are to be read, giving effect to every part of the agreement;…the intent of the parties is to be determined from the contract as a whole;” and while “extrinsic or parol evidence is admissible to explain an ambiguity or uncertainty arising out of the terms of a written instrument…[w]hen the terms in a contract are unambiguous, courts will not in effect create a new contract by finding an intent not… [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 4:00 am
(Never mind that, unless you’re friends with all these people, you likely can’t see most of them.) [read post]
14 Jun 2009, 8:43 am
They're entrepreneurs. [read post]
31 Dec 2006, 7:29 pm
I'm not always a fan of leaving the limiting constructions for cases in which they're needed, because courts sometimes forget that they're needed, but here I'm willing to trust judicial good sense. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 3:00 am
Ste. 900 Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 306-8729 Avondale Bankruptcy Law Office My AZ Lawyers 12725 W. [read post]
17 May 2011, 11:15 am
Sometimes white men can’t see it, just like sometimes you can’t tell that the Earth is curved when you’re standing on the ground. [read post]
1 Nov 2018, 10:28 am
If it doesn’t provide relief, you don’t get a fee for it. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 4:30 am
[they're] still a lawyer. [read post]
16 Jul 2019, 7:42 am
Thumann, Crehan & Thumann, LLC, Cincinnati, for Appellant American Trading II, LLC W. [read post]
28 Jan 2018, 6:40 pm
In re Ferreira, 549 B.R. 232, 237 (Bankr. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 7:12 am
If we’re able to agree as well as they did, I’d say we’re doing all right. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 9:18 am
Professor Edward W. [read post]
15 Dec 2007, 12:57 pm
Scruggs pleadings, including a re-evaluation of the supposed "whistleblower" Rigsby sisters. [read post]
18 Mar 2009, 12:19 pm
The jurors may think they're doing the right thing by trying to be as meticulous as possible, but in fact they're violating the requirement that they be impartial. [read post]
10 Jul 2021, 6:20 am
“[T]he general rule is that testimony of a witness’ opinion is not admissible into evidence” People v. [read post]
29 Nov 2012, 1:23 pm
[t]he reasoning in both the George and White cases is applicable”), aff’d, 44 F.3d 806 (9th Cir. 1995); In re TMJ Implants Products Liability Litigation, 872 F. [read post]
26 Dec 2018, 5:53 am
If Barr says that it doesn’t, then we suspect that senators will be reluctant to confirm him. [read post]
25 Aug 2014, 8:38 pm
For example, in In re Fallaux, we recognized “that the unjustified patent term extension justification for obviousness-type double patenting” may have “limited force in . . . many double patenting rejections today, in no small part because of the change in the Patent Act from a patent term of seventeen years from issuance to a term of twenty years from filing. [read post]
