Search for: "MATTER OF C B J B"
Results 961 - 980
of 3,069
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Feb 2019, 2:37 pm
“Valuation Issues in Eminent Domain Litigation: What You Need to Know” Alan Ackerman, Esq. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:13 pm
See also Comm’rs of Parks & Boulevards of City of Detroit v Moesta, 91 Mich 149, 152-53; 51 NW 903 (1892); In re Edward J. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 9:00 am
Victor J. [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 7:01 am
The EDPB recognizes that requiring another specific legal ground for secondary use would be contrary to the presumption of compatibility provided by Article 5(1)(b) of the GDPR. [read post]
18 Feb 2019, 3:17 am
Midwest Motor Supply Co. d/b/a Kimball Midwest, No. 17 C 1250, Slip Op. [read post]
15 Feb 2019, 4:00 am
Côté J. reinforced her reputation as the great dissenter. [read post]
14 Feb 2019, 4:36 pm
Furthermore, the inclusion of paragraphs (b) and (c) in s. 162(1) indicates that Parliament understood that a person could have a reasonable expectation of privacy somewhere other than in a place where nudity or explicit sexual activity can reasonably be expected or is in fact taking place. [read post]
14 Feb 2019, 4:36 pm
Furthermore, the inclusion of paragraphs (b) and (c) in s. 162(1) indicates that Parliament understood that a person could have a reasonable expectation of privacy somewhere other than in a place where nudity or explicit sexual activity can reasonably be expected or is in fact taking place. [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 6:08 am
Their admittance was therefore at the board's discretion (Article 13(1) and (3) RPBA).2.2 When exercising their discretion to admit late-filed requests into the proceedings, in particular requests filed after arrangement of oral proceedings, the boards of appeal take into account in particular whether the proposed amendments do not introduce new objections (Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, 8th ed., IV.E.4.1.3, second paragraph).2.2.1 Applying these principles to the present case,… [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 2:55 pm
(b) Heads of AI R&D agencies shall budget an amount for AI R&D that is appropriate for this prioritization. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 9:19 am
Assuming this matter goes forward, which one might think that it will unless it becomes academic, there are interesting arguments which may open up about amenability of HAs to JR (see (131)) and whether Agudas Israel was providing a system of allocation of social housing, without any relevant entitlements, or a service of providing housing accommodation – here the Divisional Court, at (50), offered a different opinion to that of Garnham J in R(XC) v Southwark… [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 5:00 am
Ashley J. [read post]
10 Feb 2019, 10:33 am
Bíziková, S. [read post]
8 Feb 2019, 6:33 am
(j) Whether the principal is or is not in business. [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 8:59 am
Joinder, however, is a different matter — since the statute expressly indicates that “The time limitation set forth in [§ 315(b)] shall not apply to a request for joinder under subsection (c). [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 6:00 am
Carnegie Endowment President William J. [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 1:00 am
J.), the court addressed discovery disputes involving the apportionment of expert witness fees in a medical malpractice matter. [read post]
3 Feb 2019, 9:05 am
Keith C. [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 10:51 am
Merritt B. [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 6:29 am
First, Spath knowingly concealed facts that called his impartiality into question; second, he angled for a position in the Justice Department when it had a substantial interest in the case before him; third, he traded on the fact that he was the judge in Al-Nashiri’s case for his own personal gain; and fourth, he allowed his personal financial interests to influence how he handled the matter. [read post]