Search for: "J. C."
Results 6941 - 6960
of 19,483
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2009, 3:29 pm
Scott J. [read post]
27 Oct 2022, 9:00 am
The following paragraphs of Schedule 2 (minor and consequential amendments)— (a) paragraph 1, in so far as it relates to paragraphs 11 and 13 to 15 of Schedule 2, (b) paragraph 11, (c) paragraph 12, (d) paragraph 13, (e) paragraph 14, (f) paragraph 15, (g) paragraph 38, in so far as it relates to paragraphs 39 and 40 of Schedule 2, (h) paragraph 39, (i) paragraph 40, and (j) paragraph 41. [read post]
9 Jan 2010, 6:26 pm
j. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 1:02 pm
C. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 6:31 am
Posted by James C. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 7:30 am
The contents are as follows: Robert J. [read post]
26 May 2012, 9:00 pm
The liberal wing minus Breyer, J., dissent. http://t.co/XkRWerTB D.C. [read post]
27 Sep 2009, 9:25 am
Moreno RB J. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 11:00 am
by Doug Beaton Attorney Douglas J. [read post]
29 Oct 2007, 7:55 am
The good news is that Glaxo should have sufficient time to file a reply before the hearing on October 31.Relevant links: Opposition to motion for preliminary injunction Exhibit 1 (Administrative record excerpts): Part 1, 2, 3Exhibit 2 (final rules)Exhibit 3 (proposed rules)Exhibit 4 (declaration of Andrew Faile, group director in Technology Center 2600), Exhibit A, B (part 1, 2), C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M Exhibit 5 (declaration of John… [read post]
16 Sep 2016, 7:02 am
Both answers B and C to question 15 were therefore marked as correct. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 6:31 am
Posted by James C. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 6:16 am
Mangino, Andrew J. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 12:00 am
Welch and Thomas C. [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 5:59 am
Posted by Robert C. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 11:34 am
Flanagan with Lawrence J. [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 1:06 pm
C. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 4:57 pm
13 Drake J. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 9:43 am
On appeal, the plaintiff argues that (1) the court improperly applied General Statutes § 46b-56 (c) (12), (2) § 46b-56 (c) (12) is unconstitutionally vague and (3) the court abused its discretion in awarding sole legal custody to the defendant. [read post]
15 Jan 2009, 4:45 pm
Scott, and J. [read post]
