Search for: "Does 1-27"
Results 6661 - 6680
of 12,448
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 May 2015, 11:54 am
Quintana, 237 A.D.2d 130, 654 N.Y.S.2d 27; Merola v Merola, supra; Kilmer v Kilmer, supra; Leffingwell v Leffingwell, supra ). [read post]
25 May 2015, 11:54 am
Quintana, 237 A.D.2d 130, 654 N.Y.S.2d 27; Merola v Merola, supra; Kilmer v Kilmer, supra; Leffingwell v Leffingwell, supra ). [read post]
24 May 2015, 2:07 pm
Respondent on April 12, 1994 filed a motion returnable April 27, 1994 seeking re-argument of the dispositional order dated April 7, 1994. [read post]
24 May 2015, 2:07 pm
Respondent on April 12, 1994 filed a motion returnable April 27, 1994 seeking re-argument of the dispositional order dated April 7, 1994. [read post]
23 May 2015, 9:00 pm
Respondent on April 12, 1994 filed a motion returnable April 27, 1994 seeking re-argument of the dispositional order dated April 7, 1994. [read post]
22 May 2015, 1:00 am
These are set out in Article 23(1) of the Brussels I Regulation (corresponding to Article 25(1) of the recast). [read post]
21 May 2015, 5:46 pm
cfem=1Liberals Are Destroying AmericaTerry BOWNERDiscussion - 6:27 AM 5 Reasons Bush Didn't Lie About WMD - by the Daily Caller1.) [read post]
19 May 2015, 4:49 am
I believe the “benefit of the employer” rule does not apply to this case. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:27 pm
The N-400 application was filed on January 27, 2015. [read post]
17 May 2015, 6:29 am
For 27 years, the Lawrence Welk show was on tv. [read post]
15 May 2015, 4:27 pm
” [189] The other key factor which the court must take into account in granting a blocking injunction is that the injunction must not impose on information society service providers a general monitoring obligation contrary to Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive, which provides as follows: “No general obligation to monitor 1. [read post]
15 May 2015, 7:03 am
Bernstein traces adversarial bias to three sources: (1) conscious bias; (2) unconscious bias; and (3) selection bias. [read post]
15 May 2015, 5:24 am
Layton/Okland, 2009 UT 39, ¶ 27, 214 P.3d 859 (Utah Supreme Court 2009). . . . [read post]
14 May 2015, 8:51 pm
Namely, the new House bill does not contain a provision in the Leahy bill that would allow a FISC judge to “assess compliance with . . . privacy procedures” “[a]t or before the end of the period of time for which the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device is approved” (27). [read post]
Case Comment: R (ZH and CN) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of Lewisham [2014] UKSC 62
14 May 2015, 1:59 am
“Home” is an autonomous concept which does not require a right of occupation in domestic law; it is a question of fact whether someone has sufficient and continuous links with a property to be occupying it as a home: see Buckley v UK (1996) 23 EHRR 101; Qazi v Harrow LBC [2003] UKHL 43; [2004] 1 AC 983; [2003] HLR 75. [read post]
13 May 2015, 10:33 pm
An agreement, after the matter was brought to court, does not justify jurisdiction. [read post]
13 May 2015, 6:09 am
(Author’s note: This article was originally posted on September 27, 2013. [read post]
13 May 2015, 4:30 am
Mississippi April 27, 2015). [read post]
13 May 2015, 4:00 am
Doucette, 2008 SCC 8 (CanLII), [2008] 1 S.C.R. 157 at paras. 23-27. [read post]
12 May 2015, 11:29 am
The last such audit in 2013 made 27 recommendations for improvements at the agency. [read post]
