Search for: "Does 1-25, Inclusive"
Results 821 - 840
of 1,143
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Mar 2015, 3:10 pm
See 29 C.F.R. 1910.119(a)(1)(ii)(B) and (2)(iii). [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 10:57 pm
[vi] But the potential price for opening a link that does not appear to be obviously suspicious can be breathtakingly high. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 10:16 am
District Court for the Western District of Texas (Case No. 1:15-cv-26). [read post]
20 Mar 2015, 9:08 am
Jones case (see H.B. 25 above) failed in the last three sessions. [read post]
16 Mar 2015, 6:00 am
What obligation does the Commission have to consider diversity and inclusion when making decisions that impact the school and larger community? [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 7:19 pm
Section 2-207(a)(1)(A) requires the inclusion of S’s one-half fractional interest. [read post]
5 Feb 2015, 4:21 pm
There were delivered to the court yesterday, or the day before, five large lever arch bundles of documents, which comprise over 2,000 pages, inclusive of the respective skeleton arguments, which are each just under 25 pages. [read post]
5 Feb 2015, 4:30 am
Does Positivity Really Matter? [read post]
31 Jan 2015, 8:24 pm
I strove to achieve what Professors Pauwelyn, Wessel and Wouters describe as “thick stakeholder consensus,” in contrast to the “thin state consent” that so often emerges from intergovernmental negotiations.1 And I then hoped to leverage that consensus into “endorsement” by the UN Human Rights Council, adding to the GPs’ authoritative stature, helping to achieve their uptake by other international standard setting bodies, and embedding them in the… [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 10:59 am
This case includes the following issues: (1) Does the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act [ICCTA] (49 U.S.C. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 3:41 am
The meaning of “treatment” Although s 1 of the Act does not use the word “treatment”, it is clear that the treatment to which s 4 refers is the termination of pregnancy under s 1. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 12:28 pm
In case you missed any of these, you might find them interesting: 1. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:14 am
1. [read post]
21 Dec 2014, 4:32 pm
Here, the court explained, while the legislative history does not expressly address the issue of whether the act protects individuals who are regarded as physically disabled, the legislature’s overarching intent to “stamp out discrimination on the basis of physical disability and a wide range of other disabilities (mental disability, learning disability, and mental retardation)” coupled with its efforts to be as inclusive as possible in defining the term physical… [read post]
24 Nov 2014, 5:32 am
First, the requirement of the inclusion of the putative cause (silicone exposure) as one of the criteria does not allow the criteria set to be tested objectively without knowledge of the presence of implants, thus incurring incorporation bias (27). [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 4:00 am
Apotex successfully argued its drospirenone/ethinyl estradiol product does not infringe. [read post]
8 Nov 2014, 3:02 pm
Introduction 1. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 9:10 pm
Id. at *25 (text added). [read post]
28 Oct 2014, 10:31 am
As such, it does not have the same level of responsibility to keep up with the most recent medical advancements as a doctor or a medical association. [read post]
20 Oct 2014, 3:27 am
” Justice Kornreich’s decision at pages 11-12 agreed with the cautionary note and rejected the SEAM adjustment, stating that “New York law does not permit an independent valuation of the minority’s equity, which would entail a separate valuation methodology and which might warrant a SEAM premium. [read post]
