Search for: "X, Y "
Results 1341 - 1360
of 4,306
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jan 2014, 12:22 pm
For example, the court may determine that “…but for Doctor X failing to diagnose that Patient Y had this fatal disease, Patient Y would still be alive. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 6:29 am
You can’t use Client X’s money for expenses of Client Y if Y is out of money. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 7:38 am
Desde el 01 de agosto de 2014, los independientes menores de 40 años deben escoger un Sistema de Pensiones, sea el público (ONP) o el privado (AFP), por tanto, se orientará debidamente al ciudadano si se le informa con verdad de los alcances de ambos sistemas al incorporarse "x" número de trabajadores a las AFP o a la ONP. [read post]
6 Feb 2011, 8:58 am
The State Y resident comes to State X to execute the will. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 9:40 am
La generación X, los millenials y la Generación Z podrían enfrentar una vejez todavía más sombría. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 11:37 am
Manifestó que el presente caso requiere examinar tres disposiciones del Código federal de Quiebra: (1) la disposición que indica quién será un deudor para propósitos del Capítulo 9 y, para evitar problemas de federalismo con la enmienda X, los estados deben autorizar la solicitud de quiebra de sus municipalidades e instrumentalidades- §109(c),- ; (2) la provisión que impide que los estados legislen sus propias… [read post]
14 Sep 2012, 3:21 pm
Can you tell me more about what happened with Patient Y on Date Z? [read post]
11 Jun 2024, 5:41 pm
More to Read More to Read More to Read The post Black Lives Matter co-founder files appeal in ‘swatting’ lawsuit, citing new evidence appeared first on J&Y Law Firm. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 7:04 am
Ein jüngerer Beitrag betrifft z.B. die Frage, auf welche Weise in Confidentiality Agreements das Verbot zur Offenlegung vertraulicher Informationen auf Mitarbeiter der Beteiligten ausgedehnt werden sollte - mit der Klausel "shall cause its Representatives not to disclose", mit "will be responsible for any disclosure, mit "any disclosure by any of X's Representatives will be deemed disclosure by X" oder "X shall indemnify Y… [read post]
16 Nov 2010, 8:36 am
A state that had previously granted X based on Y then amends its laws to give the same X based not on the now-illegal Y, but rather on Z -- with the deliberate knowledge that all (or nearly) all Z's are Y and that all or nearly all Y's are Z. [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 2:14 pm
” They also think that if the statute says x and y, then x and y are The Law. [read post]
27 Mar 2008, 4:42 pm
In theory, Google is gaining more insights into the searcher's intentions; instead of knowing just X (the first search term), it now knows X+Y, which increases the odds that we might intuit the searcher's intent well enough to assess if the searcher is being "diverted" by alternative options. [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 8:31 am
Rul. 2012-19 analyzed these issues by describing two fact patterns that involved publicly held corporations: X and Y. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 8:26 am
(This is because, absent the tying of X and Y, A would have enjoyed surplus of $1,000 on X but no surplus on Y, and B would have enjoyed surplus of $500 on Y but no surplus on X.) [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 7:15 am
The conversation always has a flattering subtext, to wit, "you're not like Professor X nor Professor Y. [read post]
31 Aug 2007, 6:49 am
For example, if comment #1 is about X topic, and comment #2 is about Y topic, then comment #3 can be on X topic and shown as such (demonstrated by the pic above with the "Oh the drama" comment). [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 5:33 am
To say that individual k has an extended preference for history (x; i) over (y; j) means something like the following: k prefers to have the attributes of individual i in outcome x, as opposed to having the attributes of individual j in outcome y. [read post]
25 Mar 2010, 10:05 pm
To wit: 15 examples of X causing Y are proof that something other than X must cause Y. [read post]
13 Aug 2011, 10:55 am
To say that individual k has an extended preference for history (x; i) over (y; j) means something like the following: k prefers to have the attributes of individual i in outcome x, as opposed to having the attributes of individual j in outcome y. [read post]
26 Aug 2009, 10:10 am
One which I'll illustrate with the following hypothetical, which is an extreme application of the principle:In 1993, the rules in murder cases allow introduction of X, Y and Z into evidence to prove an offense. [read post]
