Sentences with phrase «then discussed the claims»

Gleason writes that Dunleavy then discussed the claims with Trump himself «as evidenced by a phone call I received from Attorney Michael Cohen.»

Not exact matches

... i am discussing the god you claim to worship... even if you believe jesus was god on earth it doesn't matter for if you take what he had to say as law then you should take with equal fervor words and commands given from god itself... it stands as logical to do this and i am confused since most only do what jesus said... the dude was only here for 30 years and god has been here for the whole time — he has added, taken away, and revised everything he has set previous to jesus and after his death... thru the prophets — i base my argument on the book itself.

but thats not what i'm talking about... i am discussing the god you claim to worship... even if you believe jesus was god on earth it doesn't matter for if you take what he had to say as law then you should take with equal fervor words and commands given from god itself... it stands as logical to do this and i am confused since most only do what jesus said... the dude was only here for 30 years and god has been here for the whole time — he has added, taken away, and revised everything he has set previous to jesus and after his death... thru the prophets — i base my argument on the book itself, so if you have a counter argument i believe you haven't a full understanding of the book — and that would be my overall point... belief without full understanding of or consideration to real life or consequences for the hereafter is equal to a childs belief in santa which is why we atheists feel it is an equal comparision... and santa is clearly a bs story... based on real events from a real historical person but not a magical being by any means!

Claim 14: «Mrs. Charlotte Osei persistently antagonized the then opposition, NPP prior to the 2016 General Elections to the extent she never met any of the leadership who sought audience with her to discuss issues of concern.

Discussing the child you had with your mistress and then claiming you never had an affair.

David Coppedge - a former lead systems administrator on the Cassini Mission to Saturn who worked at JPL for 15 years - filed a lawsuit in 2009 against the agency claiming he was demoted, and then eventually fired, because of his Christian beliefs and in retaliation for discussing the theory of intelligent design at the NASA facility in La Cañada Flintridge.

Then, they discuss or write their analysis of discrepancies, evidence types used to support claims, and the clues that guided them to decide whether information was opinion, interpretation, or fact.

In this dialog, you should introduce the subject, make a claim, discuss necessary background information, and then present the evidence for the position.

It's a small detail but having your name on the top of the policy as an owner will then give you the ability to make changes, discuss or negotiate claims, and order pink slips.

«We see a lot of anger around the «net in regards to how things change over time with almost every MMORPG's development, with many claiming the developers lied about how something was going to work, or how something was perceived as being a certain way, and then when it doesn't work out quite the way players perceived, they claim that the developers deceived them, and that the launched product isn't anything like what was initially discussed during the development process.

The lawsuit also claims that the Allocation Committee inside Rockstar then decided not to give him the owed royalties but might have not actually ever met to discuss the issue, making this a unilateral decision of the two founders.

The WSJ then echoes the final of the «Hockey Stick» myths discussed on RealClimate (see Myth # 4 here), claiming that the «Hockey Stick» has now been discredited:

This link discusses some of the claims that have been made regarding reliability of wind and then shows them false using data from those operating the wind farms.

Regarding lack of independence, allowing them to discuss the papers would itself be considered an ethics violation by the author, were he to then try and claim they were independently arrived at.

In other words, he made a claim, then refused to discuss it with anyone who disagreed.

If you are claiming that the emails McI discussed were not referring to the late 20th century issues, then you are wrong.

Rawls claimed that he broke his agreement because the IPCC was dishonest in not discussing the «omitted variable» and THEN he said he had to release it because of the discussion about the omitted variable.

Giaever then claims that one person has talked about these effects - US Secretary of Energy and fellow Nobel Laureate Steven Chu, who suggested paining roofs white to offset some warming, though he does not discuss Chu in a very flattering light.

Peter, if you wish to discuss, as you claim, then discuss.

Then we can discuss whether your claims are valid or not.

If you would like to discuss instructing us on a personal injury claim arising out of a serious injury or fatality then please contact Matthew Claxson on Freephone 0800 157 7611 or [email protected]

The proof of that future loss is sometimes a difficult task and usually involves medical assessment and / or actuarial assessment); d. past care cost (if you have spend money for your medical care that was made medically necessary owing to ICBC motor vehicle accident injury then you can expect to collect a sum of money equivalent to those reasonable treatment and medication costs please ensure that you keep the receipts and seek prior medical approval to eventually prove this loss); e. future care costs (if you will suffer repeated medical expenses in the future owing to your motor vehicle accident ICBC injury claim then you can collect a sum of money equivalent to that future loss); f. out of pocket expenses or «special damages» (if you suffer out of pocket expenses like for travel to / from medical appointments, cab fare, parking, etc, then this is also recoverable by you but again — keep track of these expenses in a log and keep a receipt book for later proof of this loss); g. legal costs (sum of the legal costs associated with advancing your injury claim are recoverable as the court system recognizes that often legal experts, lawyers and their agents are a necessary part of the process); h. other categories of damages: not discussed here are other categories of damages like «in trust claims» made largely for those who relatives who take care of you while you are recovering from your injuries or things like «loss of ability to enter an economically interdependent relationship» which might be awarded to a seriously disfigured potential spouse for his / her unlikely ability to become married in the future.

Then, they discussed their findings with stakeholders and other knowledgeable sources to find a solution for FBME Bank customers with pending claims.

If you are unlikely to win class certification, then we will discuss your option of pursuing your legal claim individually.

One of our no win no fee employment solicitors will then contact you and provide you with a free initial consultation to discuss your claim.

When a claim arises, it is then found that there is no letter from the lawyer to the client confirming the things they discussed, such as the fact that the settlement was final.

If you have been injured and wish to make a claim then you are welcome to contact Gary Whitaker or Rebekah Baty who will happily arrange a meeting with you to discuss your claim at absolutely no cost to you, for free advice on 01392 285000.

The mediator will then discuss each party's claims, either in the same room or in private conferences, if necessary.

The charges don't discuss specifically what Mr. Iannicelli is accused of doing, but rather seem to regurgitate the language of the statute which he is accused of violating (C.R.S. 18-8-609 for all counts) and then claim that he violated it.

This is an important topic to discuss in regard to an insurance claim or personal injury lawsuit regarding a Scranton, Wilkes - Barre or Stroudsburg car accident, as it will be necessary to determine and then prove exactly what or who caused the car accident in order to recover full financial compensation for your injuries.

If you believe that you have had any valid claim denied by your insurance company, then please contact us to discuss it.

After discussing all the facts regarding your claim, we will then advise you on how to proceed all the while keeping your best interests at heart — even if that means advising you against filing a claim.

Read more below and then consult a Topeka personal injury attorney from our firm to discuss your claims.

If the case you discuss - which I haven't been able to find - occurred after to the ruling, then it could have been dismissed, because A did not intend it as malicious in the sense of defamation (and did not claim it was true), though it was almost certainly meant as an insult.

The time limit on bringing a claim is three years from the date of the accident; there are a few specific exceptions to this however, so if you believe that you should be able to make a claim outside of this period then our solicitors will be happy to discuss your particular circumstances with you.

Your adjuster will then discuss the resolution of your claim with you.

Many persons neglect to discuss the insurers policy for filing claims at the time that they are purchasing the policy, and then sometimes run into difficulties when it becomes necessary to file a claim.

If you share your policy with another renter, then it is important that you thoroughly discuss claims and other portions of your contract so that you are both on the same page.

The SPIS is a catch 22, If you don't fill one out your neglagent and now if you do get one filled out your liable, The items on an SPIS are items agents need to discuss and disclose in every real estate deal, so without the form as a guideline we will always have areas that get overlooked or at least areas that we will be accused of not doing enough research, an SPIS on it's own is not enough if the Seller is hidding something, but the oppourtunity to do a home inspection was included and revealed a problem, getting rid of the SPIS will not change the Seller hidding problems and then making their agent the escape goat, as always good agents will need to «protect thy @ss» RECO did nothing to acknowledge the condition for the home inspection should have been enough to allow the Buyers to verify the SPIS, this story has facts not being told otherwise the agent would not have pleaded guilty to these claims.