Search for: "Does 1-27"
Results 9061 - 9080
of 12,455
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2011, 8:34 am
Immediate Appreciation: When a contact does refer you, call or send a thank-you note the very same day. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 6:31 am
Hermon agreed, stating, “Absolutely, it does. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 12:02 am
This should immediately strike one as odd because one does not usually think of Kerala or Pondicherry as the most crime-ridden parts of India. [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 5:01 pm
The fact that the application was refused on the same ground of indefiniteness of the point of intersection must have come as a surprise to the appellant because the objection is based both on new facts (the replacement of the expression “linear object” by “thin object” in claim 1) and on new technical considerations that had not been communicated to the appellant beforehand.Therefore, the Board agrees with the appellant that the decision of the ED, insofar as it is… [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 8:35 am
The appellant’s trial began on September 27, 2010, which would have resulted in a 334-day delay between arraignment and trial – far exceeding the 180 days allowed in W.R.Cr.P. 48. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 6:30 am
A slow start was to be expected, given the small number of cases carried forward this Term. 1 But the conventional wisdom is that the Court always has a slow start in the fall (the first quarter), as it absorbs new law clerks. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 3:56 am
It observed that Family Court's jurisdiction over family offense proceedings is limited to those acts between family members that 'would constitute disorderly conduct, harassment in the first degree, harassment in the second degree, aggravated harassment in the second degree, ...stalking, menacing in the second degree, menacing in the third degree, reckless endangerment, assault in the second degree, assault in the third degree or an attempted assault (Family Ct Act 812[1] ). [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 9:52 pm
Appellant's last responsive pleading, a verified “Fifth Amended Answer and Petition for Declaratory Judgement,” in addition to containing a general denial, included the following list of matters that were designated as defenses: 1. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 11:30 am
In rejecting the settlement, Judge Rakoff said: Most fundamentally, this is because it does not provide the Court with a sufficient evidentiary basis to know whether the requested relief is justified under any of these standards. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 5:00 am
• How does the defense bar view the future? [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 1:59 am
Here are the results:Myth #1. [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 9:48 pm
The sex offender registry does all of the above and more, and it is continually updated to heap even more restrictions on anyone unfortunate to be put on it. [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 9:16 pm
Tags: advertising, discrimination law, workplace Related posts Supreme Court to consider scope of ministerial exemption (0) Supposed hiring bias against unemployed applicants (1) January 27 roundup (7) Diversity training’s triumph (2) Banning discrimination against the unemployed? [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 8:13 pm
What does it mean to maximize utility? [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 9:57 am
R. 4:23-5(a)(1)-(2). [read post]
25 Nov 2011, 8:42 am
In an October 27, 2011 Order (discussed here), Judge Rakoff scheduling a hearing for November 9, 2011 to "ascertain whether the proposed judgment is fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the public interest. [read post]
25 Nov 2011, 5:00 am
Question #1 – H-1B Nonimmigrant Work Visa Any H-1B visas left? [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm
Thus, the ground for opposition under A 100(a) does not prejudice the maintenance of the patent as granted. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 3:37 pm
Does that translate? [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 7:21 am
For example, ethics committees in both South Carolina (Opinion 94-27 1995)) and Iowa (Iowa Ethics Opinion 96-1 1996) concluded that the use of email by lawyers to communicate with clients breached confidentiality unless precautions were taken to prevent interception or client consent acknowledging the risks of using of email was obtained. [read post]
