Search for: "Precision Contracting, Inc."
Results 1081 - 1100
of 1,202
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jan 2011, 6:36 am
Well, first let me just say… it’s about damn time. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am
The first edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [Manual] was published in 1994, a year after the Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Daubert. [read post]
24 Sep 2010, 3:08 pm
Title: Placer Dome, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 5:36 pm
PTC Therapeutics, Inc., has already received some comment on the Net - the Associated Press and the New York Times ran stories, and the usual suspects over at Pharmalot picked up on it, as did a couple other denizens of the blogosphere. [read post]
20 Aug 2024, 6:24 am
Circuit’s subsequent decision in Rambus Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2009, 12:05 am
It is precisely these decisions that should be the most accessible to the public. [read post]
18 Feb 2023, 9:45 am
It is therefore important that the boundaries of the doctrine be defined precisely, and not unduly broadly. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 1:09 pm
Finishing, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 5:01 pm
The court then began its analysis of the false light issues by explaining that Rooks owns Parkland Realty, Inc., and Parkland Investments, Inc. . . . [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 4:00 am
But the line of reasoning that focuses on the old, common law definition of larceny neglects to take account of the fact that the modern definition of property for purposes of theft statutes has been broadened to include both tangible and intangible property.5 For example, the paradigmatic Model Penal Code, published first in 1962 by the sages at the American Law Institute, defines property for purposes of theft very broadly: “‘property’ means anything of value, including real… [read post]
26 Aug 2018, 3:51 pm
The NRA accuses N.Y. government officials of unconstitutionally pressuring financial services companies into not dealing with the NRA -- an ACLU friend-of-the-court brief says, "If true, those allegations represent a blatant violation of the First Amendment. [read post]
1 Oct 2009, 3:31 am
DRC, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 9:58 am
[So the California Court of Appeal has held, concluding that there is enough of a factual dispute (under California's plaintiff-friendly pleading standards) for the case to go forward.] [read post]
9 Aug 2007, 5:53 am
The FDA's clinical trial process is nothing if not fiendishly complicated, but in a nutshell, it requires manufacturers who wish to test a new drug (or device, but this controversy is almost solely about drugs) to contract with a group of doctors ("investigators") and hospitals ("institutions"), and restrict availability of the drug under study to those enrolled in research studies conducted under elaborate, FDA-approved written protocols. [read post]
17 Jun 2005, 2:55 pm
Accountability tends to be diluted as states allow courts to deal - more precisely, are happy to outsource the problem by letting courts deal - with such issues as though they were ultimately about corporations rather than about state policies and practices. [read post]
19 Jan 2008, 11:58 am
§ 1983, and for malicious prosecution, defamation, and tortious interference with a prospective contract, pursuant to Ohio state law. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 11:07 am
(F) Does a declaration in a notice of default that tracks the language ofsection 2923.5, subdivision (b) comply with the statute, even though such language doesnot on its face delineate precisely which one of the three categories set forth in thedeclaration applies to the particular case at hand? [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 5:28 am
Google, Inc., No. 12-57302 (9th Cir. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 9:57 am
Midland Credit Management, Inc. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 9:57 am
Midland Credit Management, Inc. [read post]
