Search for: "Fields v. A S"
Results 8341 - 8360
of 17,269
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jun 2015, 5:42 am
He then opened each bag and removed a trace amount of the powder for an on-site field test. [read post]
1 Jun 2015, 2:54 am
s here? [read post]
29 May 2015, 7:37 am
(See Virginia v. [read post]
29 May 2015, 7:13 am
Changing 1 point v. 10 points in five minutes is an important cue for what I need to do; v. [read post]
29 May 2015, 5:57 am
We have field agents out currently gathering information and planning the attack. [read post]
28 May 2015, 2:29 pm
Daubert v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 1:38 pm
A: Bill Graham, Warren v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 8:23 am
That’s why he’s saying it’s a slam dunk fair use. [read post]
28 May 2015, 7:44 am
” [Flint River Steamboat Co. v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 5:11 am
" Carfax, Inc. v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 4:00 am
And the distance between discovery’s and admissibility’s simplicity and reality’s complexity is aggravated by the fact that organizations are moving away from centralized ERMS’s. [read post]
28 May 2015, 4:00 am
The complaint (full text) in Doe v. [read post]
27 May 2015, 1:09 pm
As to Blu-Ray there’s no record for an exemption. [read post]
27 May 2015, 11:59 am
That’s the concern. [read post]
27 May 2015, 8:44 am
See Sensonics Inc. v. [read post]
27 May 2015, 7:42 am
” You can even say, it’s more likely to be fair use if it’s a short clip—that’s the standard articulated by the law. [read post]
27 May 2015, 2:31 am
Design in Case T-22/13In Joined Cases T-22/13 and T-23/13 Senz Technologies v OHIM - Impliva (Parapluies) the General Court decided on an application to invalidate two of Senz's Community designs consisting of the appearance of umbrellas as represented on the right.Impliva challenged the registrations on absolute grounds, under Article 52 in combination with Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation 6/2002 on Community designs, on the ground that the contested designs produced the same… [read post]
26 May 2015, 6:40 pm
Even though a trial court’s ruling on a Daubert motion is not binding on other courts, if some evidence was found lacking, other judges may be persuaded by the trial court reasoning.1 Daubert v. [read post]
26 May 2015, 2:00 pm
Courts have recognized that under Penal Law § 35.10(1) a parent may use physical force against a child when he reasonably believes it to be necessary to promote discipline or the child's welfare (see Fields, 134 AD2dat 365; see People v Prue, 219 AD2d 873 [4th Dept 1995]; People v Thompson, 9 Misc 3d 1123[A] [City Ct, Westchester County 2005]). [read post]
26 May 2015, 2:00 pm
Courts have recognized that under Penal Law § 35.10(1) a parent may use physical force against a child when he reasonably believes it to be necessary to promote discipline or the child's welfare (see Fields, 134 AD2dat 365; see People v Prue, 219 AD2d 873 [4th Dept 1995]; People v Thompson, 9 Misc 3d 1123[A] [City Ct, Westchester County 2005]). [read post]
