Search for: "MATTER OF C M R" Results 1641 - 1660 of 2,967
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jul 2007, 9:34 pm
 Even if you hired the same lawyer for all three, it’s not just a matter of adding another few paragraphs to the expunction form to include the other cause numbers, etc. [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 1:51 pm by Kelly Phillips Erb
In a C corporation, the business is owned by individual shareholders. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 10:56 am by Michael Froomkin
(He got a C on the paper proposing the campaign, by the way.) [read post]
11 Dec 2009, 12:19 pm
Section 202(a) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-2(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs: ‘(29) PRIVATE FUND- The term ‘private fund’ means an issuer that would be an investment company under section 3(a) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-3(a)) but for the exception provided from that definition by either section 3(c)(1) or section 3(c)(7) of such Act. [read post]
13 Sep 2009, 12:40 am
The author welcomes this innovation for German law in non-litigious matters as there is an increase of cross-border disputes in this subject matter. [read post]
26 Nov 2017, 8:11 am
Even without grading on a formal curve, the average grade is already a C. [read post]
1 May 2013, 12:59 am by Veronika Gaertner
The article reviews a judgment of the European Court of Justice (First Chamber) of 6 September 2012 (C-170/11), dealing with the mandatory or non-mandatory character of the European Evidence Regulation. [read post]
1 May 2016, 7:32 am by Rebecca Tushnet
 (2) That line about the 1A being our “best defense against stupid laws” is why Armijo’s position gets called Lochnerism, and I’m going to quote it in the future. [read post]
9 Apr 2011, 9:40 pm by Fiona de Londras
While this might not usually be a matter of surprise in the State Department report, the fact that the European Court of Human Rights handed down its important decision in A, B & C v Ireland in December makes it a strange omission. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 6:00 am by Administrator
In other words, section 121(1)(c) is not designed to stop improper transactions (which is the core of the bribery provision). [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 4:00 am by Deanne Sowter
Instead, Justice Tellier drew from M(K) v M(H), 1992 3 SCR 6, to explain that the “phenomenon of memory repression as a means of avoidance and denial of past trauma is recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada in relation to victims of sex assault” (para 75). [read post]