Search for: "People v. I. C. C"
Results 1 - 20
of 7,313
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Nov 2022, 8:02 am
C. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 9:21 am
Can I have natural birth after a C-section? [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 11:02 am
I'm fairly confident that Rosalinda C. is indeed still mentally disabled. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 6:51 am
When Grits compiled new data on Class C misdemeanor arrests at traffic stops from about 60 larger Texas jurisdictions, I found more than 24,500 people arrested for violations of Class C traffic laws or municipal ordinances (excluding people arrested on warrants and for Penal Code violations). [read post]
27 Dec 2023, 4:17 pm
C. [read post]
28 Dec 2010, 9:27 am
28/04 Tod’s and Tod’s France [2005] ECR I-5781, paragraph 19; and Case C-147/03 Commission v Austria [2005] ECR I-5969, paragraph 41). [read post]
15 Dec 2009, 1:55 pm
Articles 258 TFEU (ex Article 226 EC) and 260 TFEU (ex Article 227 EC) provide the appropriate remedies in cases where member States fail to fulfil their obligations under the Treaty (Case C-38/89 Blanguernon [1990] ECR I-83, paragraph 7, and Case C-163/99 Portugal v Commission [2001] ECR I-2613, paragraph 22). [read post]
8 Mar 2007, 11:25 am
Cry, it was clear that people who pled guilty before April 24, 1996 could still seek section 212(c) relief. [read post]
24 Mar 2024, 11:30 pm
Indeed, it recalled that, for data to be considered personal data, it is not necessary that people be identified directly from the information contained in the press release. [read post]
10 Aug 2020, 1:53 pm
(People v. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 6:32 am
Zachary C. [read post]
3 Apr 2013, 6:25 am
In People v. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:54 am
Most people misassume that 512(c) eliminates all liability for user-caused copyright infringement, but it only eliminates damages and limits the scope of injunctive relief in 512(j)--but a court can still issue an injunction. 512(j) is, as far as I know, not been litigated, and frankly I don't understand all of its provisions. [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 7:07 am
In other words, Bill C-11 trades prioritizing Canadian content for a market of 38 million people for de-prioritizing that same content for a global market that runs into the billions of viewers. [read post]
10 Mar 2020, 9:48 am
Here I consider some of the more significant amendments in Bill C-7. [read post]
11 Apr 2024, 9:05 am
As a reminder for those familiar, the acts that trigger an excise tax include: (i) taxes on the private foundation’s net investment income,[15] (ii) prohibitions on self-dealing transactions,[16] (iii) failure to make the required five percent (5%) qualifying distributions to charities,[17] (iv) prohibition on excess business holdings,[18] (v) prohibition on holding jeopardizing investments,[19] and (vi) taxable expenditures,[20] none of which apply to a… [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 1:20 pm
(C) A Beer Bottle. [read post]
22 Jan 2024, 4:09 pm
(D) Neither (A) nor (B).Personally, I think that (D) is the answer least likely to be true.Regardless, the defendant is sentenced to death, and the California Supreme Court unanimously affirms. [read post]
4 May 2022, 12:41 pm
May 3, 2022) The post Section 512(c) Protects Pinterest Despite Its Algorithms–Davis v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 5:19 am
In People v. [read post]
