Search for: "M. J."
Results 1861 - 1880
of 22,386
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Aug 2023, 8:20 am
Rollin M. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 2:20 am
David J. [read post]
6 Aug 2023, 9:01 pm
On July 12, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) voted 3 to 2 (Commissioners Peirce and Uyeda dissenting) to adopt certain amendments to rules and forms under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Investment Company Act”) intended to improve the resilience and transparency of money market funds (“MMFs”). [read post]
6 Aug 2023, 6:45 am
I am delighted to announce the publication of (Frank Fleerackers (ed)) The Rearguard of Subjectivity On Legal Semiotics – Festschrift in Honour of Jan M. [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 6:30 am
Ising and Thomas J. [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 6:30 am
Ising and Thomas J. [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 6:17 am
By decision and order on motion of this Court dated June 2, 2021, the respondent was immediately suspended from the practice of law in the State of New York, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.9(a)(2) and (5), and the matter was referred to the Honorable Sondra M. [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 4:20 am
Maybe I’m just forward thinking. [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 2:05 am
She can be reached at jhall@bakerdonelson.com Tyler J. [read post]
4 Aug 2023, 2:05 am
She can be reached at jhall@bakerdonelson.com Tyler J. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 9:05 pm
FDA Commissioner Robert M. [read post]
2 Aug 2023, 9:05 pm
M. and A. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 4:17 pm
Milford, et al, (J Pediatrics, 1991) studied the importance of proteinuria at one year following the acute episode of HUS in 40 children. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 9:44 am
Cassie J. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 6:30 am
Steiner, and Christopher J. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 6:30 am
Steiner, and Christopher J. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 4:00 am
For example, the first study cited was Kelly M. [read post]
30 Jul 2023, 6:00 am
Introduction Law students with a background in philosophy are sure to notice the strong influence of moral philosophy on legal thinking. [read post]
29 Jul 2023, 2:23 pm
The court also held that Section 1's prohibition on people "present[ing]," "mak[ing] available," and "show[ing]" such material to minors is also unconstitutionally vague because it leaves "librarians and booksellers unsure about whether placing books known to contain sexual content on the bookshelves may subject them to liability once a minor walks through the front door": During the evidentiary hearing, the Court asked the State whether "makes… [read post]
