Search for: "R. B."
Results 6301 - 6320
of 55,746
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2019, 11:49 am
” Ms B requested a review. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 9:54 am
Overseas Manufacturer A is thinking that if it gets the newly doubled or tripled price it will continue to manufacture for Foreign Company B and if it doesn’t get that price, it will start manufacturing Foreign Company B’s product under Foreign Company B’s trademark and sell it around the world itself. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 8:11 am
R. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 7:59 am
This provision amends section 1409(b) of Title 28 to require that any proceeding arising in or related to a bankruptcy case against a non-insider to recover a non-consumer debt of less than $25,000 (an increase from $13,650 currently) be commenced in the district where the defendant resides. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 5:01 am
[B.] [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 5:00 am
This ruling is likely to attract the interest of the Section 16(b) plaintiff’s bar, which reviews SEC filings for potential theories of private litigation. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 2:00 am
Key Findings Thirty-four states have major tax changes taking effect on January 1, 2020. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 6:28 pm
This proposal somewhat resembles Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(b): The court may dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint if unnecessary delay occurs in: (1) presenting a charge to a grand jury; (2) filing an information against a defendant; or (3) bringing a defendant to trial. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 2:59 pm
R. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 6:26 am
“But I didn’t give him the B treatment,” Trump said. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 6:14 am
Article 277(5) mandates the EBA to develop draft RTS to specify: (a) the method for identifying transactions with only one material risk driver; and (b) the method for identifying transactions with more than one material risk driver and for identifying the most material of those risk drivers for the purposes of Article 277(3). [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 5:54 am
Specifically, “No person may be authorized by a court to sue for the benefit of other alleged similarly situated persons in a case brought for violations of section 31-62-E4 of the regulations of Connecticut state agencies, unless such person, in addition to satisfying any judicial rules of practice governing class action certifications, demonstrates to the court, under the appropriate burden of proof, that the defendant is liable to all individual proposed class members because all… [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 5:54 am
Specifically, “No person may be authorized by a court to sue for the benefit of other alleged similarly situated persons in a case brought for violations of section 31-62-E4 of the regulations of Connecticut state agencies, unless such person, in addition to satisfying any judicial rules of practice governing class action certifications, demonstrates to the court, under the appropriate burden of proof, that the defendant is liable to all individual proposed class members because all… [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 5:01 am
The court concluded that, "[b]y ignoring the foreseeable risk of violence that his actions created, Mckesson failed to exercise reasonable care in conducting his demonstration. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 4:00 am
Conseil québécois sur le tabac et la santé, 2019 QCCA 358. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 10:07 pm
” Hague Convention, art. 13(b) (“grave risk” defense). [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 10:06 pm
The Second Circuit observed that Under Article 13(b) of the Hague Convention, a court is not bound to order the repatriation of a child if “[t]here is a grave risk that his or her return would expose the child to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 10:03 pm
In Díaz-Alarcón v. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 10:02 pm
Judge Elrod first focuses on Part III-B, which established the predicate for the saving construction: In Part III-B, again joined by no other Justice, Chief Justice Roberts concluded that because the individual mandate found no constitutional footing in the Interstate Commerce or Necessary and Proper Clauses, the Supreme Court was obligated to consider the federal government's argument that, as an exercise in constitutional avoidance, the mandate could be read not as a command… [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 9:51 pm
Article 13(b) of the Hague Convention establishes an exception that Anderson asserted here. [read post]
