Search for: "Does 1-35" Results 7221 - 7240 of 9,560
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 May 2011, 12:34 pm by Peter Vodola
”  The court pointed out that the statute does not define "lotteries" but looked to past judicial opinions to concluded that a lottery has three essential elements: (1) a prize; (2) chance; and (3) consideration. [read post]
1 May 2011, 9:47 pm by Adrian M. Baron
For Immediate Release                              May 1, 2011REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON OSAMA BIN LADENEast Room11:35 P.M. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 8:25 am by INFORRM
Phelps”, Cardozo Law Review de Novo, pp. 35-42, 2011. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 5:22 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
’317 patent col.16 ll.4-9; ’863 patent col.17 ll.35-40. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 1:38 am by Kevin LaCroix
 They also did not show: “‘(1) that an alleged corrective disclosure causing the decrease in price is related to the false, non-confirmatory positive statement made earlier, and (2) that it is more probable than not that it was this related corrective disclosure, and not any other unrelated negative statement, that caused the stock price decline. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 10:40 pm by 1 Crown Office Row
Where they come into conflict, “an intense focus on the comparative importance of the specific rights being claimed in the individual case is necessary” (In re S (A Child) ([2005] 1 AC 593, at [17]). [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
  Even where a product’s risks were unavoidable, it required an independent balancing of risks and benefits – the kind of thing the FDA does – before the risks involved would be considered “apparently reasonable. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm by Stu Ellis
  But what is the practice by livestock producers and what does the consumer not know about the recent changes? [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 1:25 pm by Hani Sarji
Does repealing the estate tax boost the economy? [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 5:18 pm by INFORRM
Where they come into conflict, “an intense focus on the comparative importance of the specific rights being claimed in the individual case is necessary” (In re S (A Child) ([2005] 1 AC 593, at [17]). [read post]