Search for: "Does 1-82" Results 1061 - 1080 of 1,906
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jan 2014, 10:47 am
Nor does it seem relevant that the alleged act of vandalism here—as in Cresthill and Louisville—did not bring the alleged vandals in direct contact with the covered property. [read post]
30 Jan 2020, 6:51 am
Does that mean antivirus services for Linux-based operating systems must be excluded from the mark? [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 9:01 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
” Appellee’s Br. 19.A 1922 case was invoked:Nor does the existence of an interim appellate deci- sion on invalidity change the basic rule. [read post]
  (2) if so, does that modification also significantly impair an essential behavior pattern of a listed species? [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am by Public Employment Law Press
The legislature amended Civil Service Law § 167 (1) to codify the negotiated contribution rates for qualifying employees who retired after January 1, 1983, but the amendment did not change the State's contribution rates for qualifying employees who had retired before that date (see L 1983, ch 14, § 1). [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am by Public Employment Law Press
The legislature amended Civil Service Law § 167 (1) to codify the negotiated contribution rates for qualifying employees who retired after January 1, 1983, but the amendment did not change the State's contribution rates for qualifying employees who had retired before that date (see L 1983, ch 14, § 1). [read post]
20 Aug 2007, 7:43 pm
  Does the company offer "cutting edge technology", "select your own loads", but only if you are there for 1 year, some people don't make it that long as contractors? [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 1:37 pm
Both photographs were date-stamped July 6, 2013, and were admitted into evidence as State's Exhibits 1 and 2, respectively. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 9:21 am by Bernie Burk
Again, no one should (or presumably does) attend law school expecting only short-term contract employment. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 8:01 am by Tom Dannenbaum
The Protocol I provision requires states to criminalize the listed acts domestically, including with the present-in form of universal jurisdiction (Article 85(1) AP I, as informed, e.g., by Article 146 Geneva Convention IV), but does not directly underpin the jurisdiction of any supranational court or tribunal. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:33 pm by Administrator
Gagnon, 2006 SCC 17, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 621). [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 9:40 am by Dan Harris
U.S. politicians may still be playing lip-service to the notion that government should stay out of local business, but that does NOT apply to international commerce. [read post]