Search for: "State v. Lowe" Results 901 - 920 of 9,756
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Apr 2015, 12:01 pm by Robert Rouder (US)
” However, under the proposed guidance, devices that are low risk will be fully exempt from FDA oversight if (but only if) they are not advertised as addressing a disease state. [read post]
17 May 2020, 9:01 pm by Neil H. Buchanan
This is especially true because the deal that has always accompanied working in the public sector is for workers to receive relatively low salaries compared to what they could earn in the private sector but to balance that with better benefits, including pension benefits. [read post]
22 Jan 2011, 8:49 am by Adam Baker
No, since the tender documents reserved a right to negotiate with the low bidder after opening. [read post]
27 Dec 2021, 8:15 am by Eric Goldman
Normally I’m Team Vegan all the way, but I exit Team Chloe when I see a low-merit copyright claim like this. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 6:22 am by Timothy P. Flynn
After Atkins, the High Court provided scant additional guidance, holding that states could not rely on any single factor, such as a low IQ, in making the mental disability determination.In any death penalty case, there are two trials: one determines guilty or innocence; the other determines punishment at a sentencing trial. [read post]
16 Feb 2022, 8:40 am by Ellen T. Berge and Shahin O. Rothermel
Here we break down the compliance challenges posed by varying state laws addressing automatic renewal programs (also known as continuous service, continuity, subscription, or negative option programs), how newer card brand rules further stir the pot, and the low-hanging fruit that law enforcement agencies and private plaintiffs are going after for monetary redress and injunctive relief. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 8:38 am by Jason Shinn
The suit alleges that Jimmy John’s is violating state law by requiring its sandwich makers and delivery drivers (i.e. low-wage workers) to sign restrictive noncompetition agreements. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 1:56 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
As to Lowe's opposition, the majority stated that "[t]he Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to consider the affidavits of the purported experts proffered by Lowe, since Lowe failed to identify the experts in pretrial disclosure and served the affidavits after the note of [*7]issue and certificate of readiness attesting to the completion of discovery were filed in this matter" (id. at 863 [emphasis added]). [read post]