Search for: "S. B.1" Results 61 - 80 of 64,229
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Nov 2008, 2:55 pm
And so it’s crunch time for 403(b) plans. [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 2:47 pm by Evidence ProfBlogger
Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) indicates that A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay: (1) A Declarant-Witness’s Prior Statement. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 6:03 am by Deb Boiarsky
 For any changes that occurred before January 1, 2014 and were not previously reported to the IRS, a Form 8822-B filing is required by March 1, 2014. [read post]
7 Jan 2021, 6:20 am by Evidence ProfBlogger
Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) provides an exclusion to the rule against hearsay for a statement that (B) is consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered: (i) to rebut an express or implied charge that the declarant recently fabricated... [read post]
14 Aug 2014, 5:00 am
Come January 1, most NJ employers will no longer be able to ask about an applicant's criminal record during the initial employment application process. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 5:23 am by leXpeak - Author
USCIS issued a memorandum amending the Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM) on Form I-140 Issues (AFM Update AD07-26). [read post]
18 Sep 2012, 2:58 pm by K&L Gates
”  Because three of the four categories of information sought by Defendant failed Rule 34(b)(1)(A)’s “reasonable particularity” requirement, the court largely denied Defendant’s motion to compel.In this employment discrimination case, Plaintiff claimed that she suffered mental and emotional distress as a result of Defendant’s alleged wrongdoing. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 6:00 am by Wystan M. Ackerman
Rule 23(c)(1)(B) The Seventh Circuit concluded that a “precise definition of the class, claims, issues and defenses” was necessary: (1) under the plain text of Rule 23(c)(1)(B); (2) in order to provide an appropriate basis for appellate review; and (3) so that parties can adequately prepare for a class action trial. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 6:00 am
For more information on B-1/B-2 Status, please contact our office! [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 6:22 am
Because the state-law claims could not be pursued under § 502(a)(1)(B), and because they rely on legal duties that are [...] [read post]
25 Nov 2011, 4:42 pm by tom
When an Section 1(b) intent-to-use trademark application receives a Notice of Allowance, the applicant has six months to file an acceptable statement of use to prove that the applied-for mark is being used in commerce. [read post]
10 Apr 2007, 10:14 am
§ § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) and 846.HELD: District court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion for mistrial based on Confrontation Clause violation resulting from improper admission of hearsay evidence. [read post]
31 Jul 2007, 5:06 am
§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(iii).HELD: District court did not err by relying on testimony of witness who violated witness sequestration in denying defendant's suppression motion.Read the opinion here. [read post]
17 May 2013, 11:59 am by Terry Leeders
(b) (1) Except with respect to a setoff of a kind described in section 362 (b)(6), 362 (b)(7),362 (b)(17), 362 (b)(27), 555, 556, 559, 560, 561, 365 (h), 546 (h), or 365 (i)(2) of this title, if a creditor offsets a mutual debt owing to the debtor against a claim against the debtor on or within 90 days before the date of the filing of the petition,… [read post]