Search for: "Sullivan v. Day"
Results 1081 - 1100
of 1,205
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Aug 2019, 3:00 am
National/Federal Campaigns Say They’ll Match Political Contributions. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 11:00 am
Sullivan, for appellants. [read post]
25 Oct 2008, 12:18 am
(IP Think Tank) A defining time for the IP market (IAM) Busting an intellectual capital myth (Pat Sullivan’s Blog) Governments, financial stakeholders meet on policy for IP as collateral (Intellectual Property Watch) (IP finance) How much should you spend on start-up marketing? [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 2:13 pm
As I’ve mentioned here previously, PFF has been rolling out a new series of essays examining proposals that would have the government play a greater role in sustaining struggling media enterprises, “saving journalism,” or promoting more “public interest” content. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 5:09 am
” Marquart v. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 6:28 am
Bantam Books v. [read post]
1 Mar 2023, 9:29 am
Sullivan, 931 F.2d 914, 917-23 (D.C. [read post]
17 Dec 2020, 12:08 pm
Maine 2002); Sullivan v. [read post]
17 Dec 2020, 12:08 pm
Maine 2002); Sullivan v. [read post]
26 Jul 2021, 12:52 pm
Sullivan (1963). [read post]
26 Jul 2021, 12:52 pm
Sullivan (1963). [read post]
20 May 2022, 2:44 pm
Kathleen Sullivan.) [read post]
17 Dec 2017, 3:28 pm
Conceptually, this proposition violates logic because a loan is obviously not “made” when the borrower has already been in default for 180 days, which is the ordinary period of time before the account balance is charged off. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 2:37 pm
Except as otherwise noted, HHS generally intends to provide covered entities and business associates with a compliance period of 180 days following the release and effective date of the final rule. [read post]
27 Dec 2012, 9:01 pm
(The public does not think well of filibusters, and in days past, before C-Span, the public was seldom aware when they occurred, and disdainful when they did. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 6:00 am
This is a guest post by the Law Librarian of Congress, Aslihan Bulut. [read post]
16 Jan 2021, 10:57 pm
”[44] If a letter of intent falls within the first or second category, courts generally do not consider it binding; but if it falls in the third or fourth category, courts generally consider it a binding contract.[45] For example, in Hunneman Real Estate Corp. v. [read post]
14 May 2019, 9:27 am
” Fanworks provide incredible benefits in literacy, sexuality education, language learning, community building, and other good things that come from making something you love and sharing it with other people who might just love it too.On the content v. tech distinction that Maria Strong made: we consider ourselves content folks who use tech. [read post]
27 Mar 2016, 2:54 pm
Section V then posits an alternative analysis, normatively autonomous (though not entirely free) of the orbit of the state, a vision possible only when the ideological presumptions of the state are suspended. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 1:07 pm
Citing Stump v. [read post]
