Search for: "Adoption of D. S. C. (1979)"
Results 81 - 100
of 209
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Nov 2013, 7:41 am
Reg. 37434, 37437 (FDA June 26, 1979). [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am
Cuomo, & c., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 5:46 am
Cuomo, & c., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 12:39 am
SO 13 and SO 14 of the House of Bishops stand as originally adopted in 1978. [read post]
3 Sep 2007, 1:22 pm
United States, 440 U.S. 48 (1979) that "[c]reditors' entitlements in bankruptcy arise in the first instance from the underlying substantive law creating the debtor's obligation, subject to any qualifying or contrary provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. [read post]
21 Aug 2012, 8:57 am
Ohio Edison Co., 611 F.2d 1170, 1178-1179 (6th Cir.1979). [read post]
21 Jan 2023, 11:40 am
Kunkel declined to approve Smith’s request to withdraw his resignation, citing 4 NYCRR5.3(c) of the rules. [read post]
21 Jan 2023, 11:40 am
Kunkel declined to approve Smith’s request to withdraw his resignation, citing 4 NYCRR5.3(c) of the rules. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 5:03 pm
The restatement does not specify the seller’s role in the chain of distribution or the extent of a particular seller’s control over the product. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Addressing Smith's constitutional challenge to 4 NYCRR 5.3(c), the Appellate Division rejected Smith� [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Addressing Smith's constitutional challenge to 4 NYCRR 5.3(c), the Appellate Division rejected Smith� [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Addressing Smith's constitutional challenge to 4 NYCRR 5.3(c), the Appellate Division rejected Smith� [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Addressing Smith's constitutional challenge to 4 NYCRR 5.3(c), the Appellate Division rejected Smith� [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 12:32 pm
Code § 2703(d). [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 1:07 pm
The Center attached the transcript of Hillary’s plea. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 9:57 am
June 25, 1979), rev’d in part on other grounds. [read post]
12 May 2023, 9:21 am
In finding the employee did not lose the protection of the Act when he raised concerns about the employees’ working conditions to the employer’s safety manager at a safety meeting, the Board adopted the judge’s application of the four-factor test set forth in Atlantic Steel. [read post]
9 May 2007, 1:34 pm
The Draft would change that, by adopting a "common issues" test focusing on only whether aggregation will "materially advance the disposition of multiple civil claims. [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 4:00 am
Armadale Publishers Ltd., [1979] 1 S.C.R. 1067: (a) the comment must be on a matter of public interest; (b) the comment must be based on fact; (c) the comment, though it can include inferences of fact, must be recognisable as comment; (d) the comment must satisfy the following objective test: could any [person] honestly express that opinion on the proved facts? [read post]
8 May 2008, 12:01 pm
Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 547 (1979). [read post]
