Search for: "I. C. " Results 7761 - 7780 of 55,371
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Nov 2012, 11:02 am by Joel Bolstein
  That's probably the most significant thing in the proposed PNDI policy for brownfield developers, although I can't say that for sure. [read post]
15 Aug 2007, 6:19 pm
I'll be catching up through the day tomorrow. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 3:58 pm by Ron
I read this article as supporting my conclusion in “Bet the Farm” Versus “Law Factory": Which One Works? [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 4:03 pm
I had hoped that BigLaw would make fundamental changes, prompted by the crisis. [read post]
21 Feb 2018, 11:58 am by Daniel Cappetta
General Laws c.276, §58, sixth par., provides in pertinent part that ‘[i]f a person is on release pending the adjudication of a prior charge, and the [judge] … finds probable cause to believe that the person has committed a crime during said period of release, the [judge] shall then determine, … whether the release of said person will seriously endanger any person or the community [in which case the person may be held without bail for up to sixty days]. [read post]
6 May 2010, 2:12 am by gmlevine
That he does not actively use the website “beyond the showing of a picture of a sunflower [is] of no relevance … given that this is not a required condition under paragraph 4(c)(i) and (ii) of the Policy. [read post]
26 Dec 2006, 1:44 pm
"[1] What has been less reported, as detailed by Igor Khripunov and William C. [read post]
17 Apr 2019, 3:49 am by Dan Filler
Visiting Professor - Conflicts and Remedies The University of Memphis Cecil C. [read post]
29 Dec 2018, 7:34 am by Erik J. Heels
To those who call Boston Red Sox fans ‘insufferable’ I say this: I suffered for 38 years. [read post]
16 May 2015, 3:17 pm by Kevin
Yes, you have to do it with a straight face. crickets> C'mon. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 5:18 am
"Lord Penrose talked quite strongly about how he would be prepared to name names and I think that is what will be new about Penrose. [read post]
12 May 2018, 1:14 pm by Daniel Cappetta
Caetano, 470 Mass. 774 (2015) (Caetano I), we held that §131J did not violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms, as interpreted by District of Columbiav. [read post]
12 May 2018, 1:14 pm by Daniel Cappetta
Caetano, 470 Mass. 774 (2015) (Caetano I), we held that §131J did not violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms, as interpreted by District of Columbiav. [read post]