Search for: "JOHN DOE ENTITIES" Results 1801 - 1820 of 3,199
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 May 2015, 4:37 am
  The Court of Appeal (through Sir John Mummery) essentially agreed with Arnold J. and dismissed the appeal. [read post]
8 May 2015, 5:34 am by SHG
  The investigation of one entity by another, particularly where the two entities harbor a healthy skepticism toward each other, suggests a level of honest scrutiny that can’t be achieved by an entity investigating itself. [read post]
6 May 2015, 1:39 pm by John Wright
Since police already have ready access to driver license databases, the officer does not have to interact with a patient to determine if he is a cardholder. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 1:02 pm by Simon Chester
So where does this leave the Law Society? [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 8:12 am by Eric Goldman
Photo credit: enameled house number two hundred and thirty // ShutterStock My cup runneth over with Section 230 cases! [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 3:01 pm by Venkat Balasubramani
” While the underlying information obtained using the service may be, there is no allegation that any of the information provided by LinkedIn (e.g., “John Doe and Jane Doe may have overlapped at Acme Corporation; contact Jane to find a reference about John”) figured in an employment decision. [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 6:16 am by SHG
Dialogue is unfair to require of everyone, especially if they feel disempowered by the entity or person with whom they are engaging in dialogue. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 6:38 pm by Jon Markman
Public”, “John Doe” and “John Smith” all showed up, along with “NoneNone”, “first_last” and, in the case of 80 TVBDs, “Meld test”. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 6:00 am by Martha Engel
  But does it need something like the concept of genericide? [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 2:15 pm by Wells Bennett
John Ratcliffe (R-TX), intend it to be. *** Gregory T. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 9:41 am by Steven Buchwald
However, federal courts have squarely rejected this approach holding that “the bare assignment of the right to sue cannot confer standing”((John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 7:33 am by Jim Sedor
The law had applied to government entities with more than 50,000 people; that threshold was decreased to 5,000 people and was expanded to in [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 4:01 am by Andres
This is one of the main mistakes that John Oliver makes. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 7:18 pm by Schachtman
While this new information is important to include as a correction to the history, it does not change the authors’ clinical opinion … . [read post]