The issue here concerns whether the judge proceeded on a wrong principle, in
conflict with other authorities.
Not exact matches
The Arbitrator (i) shall apply internal laws of the State of New York consistent
with the Federal Arbitration Act and applicable statutes of limitations, or, to the extent (if any) that federal law prevails, shall apply the law of the U.S., irrespective of any
conflict of law principles; (ii) shall entertain any motion to dismiss, motion to strike, motion for judgment on the pleadings, motion for complete or partial summary judgment, motion for summary adjudication, or any
other dispositive motion consistent
with New York or federal rules of procedure, as applicable; (iii) shall honor claims of privilege recognized at law; and (iv) shall have
authority to award any form of legal or equitable relief;
These responsibilities include: (i) fostering processes that allow the Board to function independently of management and encouraging open and effective communication between the Board and management of the Company; (ii) providing input to the Chairman on behalf of the independent Directors
with respect to Board agendas; (iii) presiding at all meetings of the Board at which the Chairman is not present, as well as regularly scheduled executive sessions of independent Directors; (iv) in the case of a
conflict of interest involving a Director, if appropriate, asking the
conflicted Director to leave the room during discussion concerning such matter and, if appropriate, asking such Director to recuse him or herself from voting on the relevant matter; (v) communicating
with the Chairman and the CEO, as appropriate, regarding meetings of the independent Directors and resources and information necessary for the Board to effectively carry out its duties and responsibilities; (vi) serving as liaison between the Chairman and the independent Directors; (vii) being available to Directors who have concerns that can not be addressed through the Chairman; (viii) having the
authority to call meetings of the independent Directors; and (ix) performing
other functions as may reasonably be requested by the Board or the Chairman.
Among them were pantheism and the positions that human reason is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood and good and evil; that Christian faith contradicts reason; that Christ is a myth; that philosophy must be treated without reference to supernatural revelation; that every man is free to embrace the religion which, guided by the light of reason, he believes to be true; that Protestantism is another form of the Christian religion in which it is possible to be as pleasing to God as in the Catholic Church; that the civil power can determine the limits within which the Catholic Church may exercise
authority; that Roman Pontiffs and Ecumenical Councils have erred in defining matters of faith and morals; that the Church does not have direct or indirect temporal power or the right to invoke force; that in a
conflict between Church and State the civil law should prevail; that the civil power has the right to appoint and depose bishops; that the entire direction of public schools in which the youth of Christian states are educated must be by the civil power; that the Church should be separated from the State and the State from the Church; that moral laws do not need divine sanction; that it is permissible to rebel against legitimate princes; that a civil contract may among Christians constitute true marriage; that the Catholic religion should no longer be the religion of the State to the exclusion of all
other forms of worship; and «that the Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself to and agree
with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.»
The conditions, in a nutshell, are that the group and its purpose must be clearly defined; costs and benefits must be equally shared; decision - making must be by consensus; misconduct should be monitored; sanctions should start out mild and escalate only as needed;
conflict resolution should be fast and fair; the group must have the
authority to manage its affairs; and the relationship of the group
with others must be appropriately structured.
But it would declare as «out of bounds» all arguments that are based on
other considerations, including: a) personal political ambitions; b) the retention or acquisition of power or
authority for its own sake; c) a commitment to a broken status quo out of an abstract fear of change; d) personality
conflicts; and e)
other institutional interests, including those of the Newark Teachers Union, when inconsistent
with the interests of children.
These provisions are consistent
with and do not supersede,
conflict with or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by existing statute or Executive order relating to (1) classified information, (2) communications to Congress, (3) the reporting to an Inspector General of a violation of any law, rule, or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of
authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or (4) any
other whistleblower protection.
Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward - looking statements include, without limitation, possible product defects and product liability, risks related to international sales and potential foreign currency exchange fluctuations, the initiation or outcome of litigation, acts or potential acts of terrorism, international
conflicts, significant fluctuations of quarterly operating results, changes in Canadian and foreign laws and regulations, continued acceptance of RIM's products, increased levels of competition, technological changes and the successful development of new products, dependence on third - party networks to provide services, dependence on intellectual property rights, and
other risks and factors detailed from time to time in RIM's periodic reports filed
with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, and
other regulatory
authorities.
So, you've got two
conflicting points here: one is that two - way bike lanes are correlated
with stronger bicycling growth than any
other type of protected bike lane in this NITC report (more research needs to be done to confirm causation, not simply correlation), and second is that on - street two - way bike lanes are considerably less safe than on - street one - way bike lanes according to numerous bicycle planning experts and
authorities.
Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in upholding the EPA's assertion of
authority to second - guess a permitting decision made by the State of Alaska — which had been delegated permitting
authority under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § § 7401 et seq. — in
conflict with decisions of this Court and
other federal courts of appeals establishing the division of federal - state jurisdiction under the Act and similar statutory programs.
In the absence of clear statutory
authority for police to obtain subscriber information (and
other personal information) without a warrant, the term «lawful
authority» has been fraught
with conflicting interpretations,
with some TSPs taking the position that it means a warrant or court order, and
with courts struggling to determine its scope.
In my judgment, the opinion of the majority of the court in that case is in
conflict with its previous decisions,
with a great weight of judicial
authority in
other slaveholding States, and
with fundamental principles of private international law.
Each party represents and warrants that it has the right, power, and
authority to enter into these Agent Terms and to perform its obligations and duties hereunder, and that the performance of such obligations and duties does not and will not
conflict with or result in a breach of any
other agreement of such party or any judgment, order or decree by which such party is bound.