Search for: "Matter of Scott" Results 721 - 740 of 6,693
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Apr 2021, 4:35 am by SHG
And with the bipartisan support of Republican Senator Tim Scott, it should be a done deal. [read post]
27 May 2021, 5:45 am
Related research from the Program on Corporate Governance includes The Agency Problems of Institutional Investors by Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen, and Scott Hirst (discussed on the Forum here); Index Funds and the Future of Corporate Governance: Theory, Evidence, and Policy by Lucian Bebchuk and Scott Hirst (discussed on the forum here); and The Specter of the Giant Three by Lucian Bebchuk and Scott Hirst (discussed on the… [read post]
16 Feb 2007, 10:06 am
AT&T (05-1056), a software code dispute under patent law; being argued Feb. 21; in Scott v. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 6:38 pm by Tom Smith
” For all practical legal purposes, pro-choicers generally put forth the same legal argument as did the majority in Dred Scott v. [read post]
14 Oct 2011, 4:32 pm by McNabb Associates, P.C.
Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 1:19 pm by Silver Law Group
Scott Silver, Esq, is the chairman of the securities fraud group of the American Association of Justice and a frequent author and speaker on investment fraud matters. [read post]
10 Mar 2012, 5:57 am by Scott Lewis
Remember, the facts always matter and an ALJ may look at how long you have been living in your current residence when making a decision to hear your case or not hear your case. [read post]
8 Feb 2011, 2:25 pm by Scott David Stewart
At the Law Offices of Scott David Stewart, we are always here to answer your questions and provide you with the legal advice you can rely on. [read post]
8 Jan 2017, 8:04 am by The Public Employment Law Press
To the contrary, Public Officers Law §89 expressly permits an agency to delete ‘identifying details’ from records that it makes available to the public (Public Officers Law §89[2][a]), and provides that ‘disclosure shall not be construed to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy . . . when [such] identifying details are deleted’ (Public Officers Law § 89 [2] [c] [i]; see Matter of Scott, Sardano & Pomeranz v Records Access… [read post]