Search for: "G. N. Sellers, III"
Results 1 - 20
of 32
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2019, 8:59 am
§115(d)(3)(E)(iii)] Most importantly, “[t]he musical works database shall be made available to members of the public in a searchable, online format, free of charge. [read post]
17 Oct 2020, 4:07 am
Incluso subraya que habla del "personal", sin distinguir género. [read post]
5 Feb 2010, 6:02 am
" Id. at n.4. [read post]
17 May 2007, 6:42 am
App. 2006), reh'g denied, vacated. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 1:27 pm
Hamlet act III, scene II) of the use of a plain meaning rule of statutory construction in an area where the meaning and application of the statutory framework is anything but clear. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 9:01 pm
Schneiderman, a suit brought by merchants challenging New York General Business Law §518, providing that “[n]o seller in any sales transaction may impose a surcharge on a holder who elects to use a credit card in lieu of payment by cash, check, or similar means. [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 4:00 pm
[iii] IRS Reg §1.1015-1(g) [iv] See, IRS Publication 544, pg. 3 for more detail. [read post]
22 Feb 2020, 6:11 am
III. [read post]
30 Sep 2012, 2:05 pm
What happened though, is that the court turned this logic on its head, using clause (iii) as sword against the free-standing liquor store when the court wrote: “[i]n fact, if common ownership and operation were essential to qualify, then the restrictive covenant’s other stated exemption [clause (iii)] allowing ‘any store or operation that sells liquor as an ancillary part of the business’ would be meaningless. [read post]
30 Sep 2012, 2:05 pm
What happened though, is that the court turned this logic on its head, using clause (iii) as sword against the free-standing liquor store when the court wrote: “[i]n fact, if common ownership and operation were essential to qualify, then the restrictive covenant’s other stated exemption [clause (iii)] allowing ‘any store or operation that sells liquor as an ancillary part of the business’ would be meaningless. [read post]
8 May 2016, 9:01 pm
Current Status: 4/12/2016 - Senate Insurance, (Third Hearing) ORC Sections: 1753.07, 1753.09, 3901.21, 3963.01, 3963.02, 3963.03 HB102 VETERAN-OWNED BUSINESSES (CRAIG H, ANTANI N) To provide a bid preference for state contracts to a veteran-owned business and to authorize a personal income and commercial activity tax credit for a business that hires and employs a veteran for at least one year. [read post]
1 May 2009, 2:00 am
Arato, Vice President, Associate General Counsel, CA, Inc.; Kenneth N. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 7:00 am
—PART III— Commercial Speech and the First Amendment One question that curiously has only sporadically come up in the native discussion is the level of First Amendment protection that should be afforded to such speech. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 6:51 am
Try to obtain a non-compete from the sellers of the business.5. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 3:52 pm
§ 853(n)(6)(A). [read post]
21 Sep 2008, 5:59 pm
Plaintiffs Geoffrey N. [read post]
7 May 2018, 10:25 pm
(D .I. 1) On May 4, 2016, the parties stipulated to transfer the case to this court, and the action was transferred on May 11, 2016, _(DJ. 16; D.I. 19) On March 15, 2017, both the Trusts and Indenture Trustee filed cross-motions for summary judgment.[7] (D.I. 55; D.I. 57) The court heard oral argument on May 12, 2017.III. [read post]
29 Mar 2013, 2:00 pm
Mallis, 485 A.2d 423, n. 6 (Pa.Super. 1984) and Surace v. [read post]
14 Apr 2019, 7:54 am
Ass'n, 858 S.W.2d 33, 36 (Tex. [read post]
