Search for: "Matter of M C B" Results 1541 - 1560 of 3,550
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Dec 2016, 9:39 am by Emma Durand-Wood
My favourite reads: Double Aspect, Administrative Law Matters, Slaw. [read post]
18 Nov 2016, 12:53 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
NJ Management Gp.: used image of 9/11 fireman juxtaposed against Iwo Jima photo; Fox was trying to say that they didn’t need to license that b/c they were commemorating the event. [read post]
17 Nov 2016, 6:57 am by Lee E. Berlik
If Gang Member A tells Gang Member B falsely that Gang Member C had a change of heart and is refusing to participate in an upcoming robbery, this may lower Gang Member C in the eyes of Gang Member B, but the law doesn’t care because a criminal enterprise is not a substantial nor a respectable segment of society. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 6:51 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  Project engages w/2 debates: relationship b/t registration and use, b/c this problem is most acute when the registration’s scope doesn’t come close to the actual scope. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 6:16 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  [I’m reminded of Real Genius: would you call that a design flaw, or an implementation flaw?] [read post]
11 Nov 2016, 7:38 am
The Supreme Court began its analysis of the issues before it by explaining that[c]ertiorari is an extraordinary remedy that is not granted as a matter of right, but rather at the court's discretion. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 8:58 am by Arthur F. Coon
Resources Code, § 21005(b)), and such prejudice occurs when “the failure to include relevant information precludes informed decisionmaking and informed public participation[.] [read post]
8 Nov 2016, 8:09 am by Daniel Shaviro
  I rather like this quote from the newly published Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels, Democracy for Realists:  “[M]ost residents of democratic countries have little interest in politics and do not follow news of public affairs beyond browsing the headlines. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 6:30 am by Tom Zagorsky
Private funds relying on section 3(c)(7) of the 1940 Act must, among other things, only admit qualified purchasers as investors; while, on the other hand, private funds relying on section 3(c)(1) of the 1940 Act may also admit accredited investors. [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
It is entirely unsurprising the matter was sent to the High Court in those circumstances as the court had decided that M was vulnerable and lacked capacity. [read post]