Search for: "Correct Care, LLC" Results 1141 - 1160 of 1,292
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Nov 2020, 3:59 pm by Eugene Volokh
" Lane testified that the statement that Judge Bruno had not paid a dime in child support for 13 years cannot be correct. [read post]
28 Mar 2023, 2:19 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
Texas,867 F.3d 604 (5th Cir. 2017), as well as third-party standing, June Medical Services LLC v. [read post]
4 Sep 2022, 2:53 pm by Rob Robinson
The heightened regulations around data subject access requests (DSARs) — formal requests made by a consumer to an organization asking for details about how their data is being collected, used, stored, and shared — require careful consideration. [read post]
4 Apr 2019, 12:36 pm by Eric Goldman
The court emphasizes that OSU didn’t allege contributory liability, but that’s easy enough to correct in future litigation. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 8:28 am by tjsllibrary
In short the complaint alleges that Sony did not take “reasonable care to protect, encrypt, and secure the private and sensitive data of its users” and that this precluded consumers from being able to make informed decisions about how to best mitigate the possible damages that could result from having their information stolen (Ogg; Clark). [read post]
23 May 2019, 7:12 am by John Elwood
Jackson Masonry, LLC, 18-938. [read post]
24 Sep 2010, 2:50 pm by Mandelman
Oh, and what follows is GMAC’s “CONFIDENTIAL” memorandum… they labeled it “privileged & confidential,” but anyone want to guess how much I care about that? [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
The Editor’s Note is a curious hybrid – neither a correction nor an apology but an opportunity for the aggrieved to record their version of the facts. [read post]
16 Jul 2023, 10:41 pm by Robin E. Kobayashi
Gill, individually, and dba Major Express Logistics, Peoplease LLC, National Interstate Richfield, Defendants, 2023 Cal. [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 4:07 pm by Schachtman
  The trial court rejected “[a]ny suggestion that an opposing expert must be able to verify the correctness of an expert’s work before it can be admitted… ”; any such suggestion “misstates the standard for admission of expert evidence under [Fed.R.Evid.] 702. [read post]
9 Nov 2017, 9:04 am by Jason Rantanen
After a careful analysis of stems at different thresholds, it turned out that the top 3% of stems (516 stems) occurred 30 or more times in the sample and included stems that, for the most part, would likely not be considered relevant to a written description analysis, whether or not a synonym was present in the provisional. [read post]