Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Since then, kè has been used as shorthand to talk about time in 1 ⁄ 8 of a double hour or 1 ⁄ 4 of a single hour. Their usage is similar to using "quarter hour" for 15 minutes or "half an hour" for 30 minutes in English. For example, 6:45 can be written as "6 diǎn, 3 kè" (六点 三 刻; 六點 三 刻).
State agencies promulgate rules and regulations (sometimes called administrative law) in the Register of Ohio, which are in turn codified in the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC). Ohio's legal system is based on common law , which is interpreted by case law through the decisions of the Supreme Court, District Courts of Appeals, and trial courts ...
The basis for this hearsay exception is the belief that a statement made under the stress is likely to be trustworthy and unlikely to be a premeditated falsehood. Compared to present sense impression, excited utterance is broader in scope for permitting a longer time lapse between event and statement, and a wider range of content in the statement.
Ohio State is being limited to fewer possessions, thus fewer points this year, partly as a result of opponents taking advantage of new clock rules.
Jul. 7—Issue 1, up for a statewide vote on Aug. 8, proposes making it harder to pass a constitutional amendment and making it harder for citizen-initiated amendments to get on the ballot in the ...
Issue 1 would permanently end majority rule in Ohio and give 40 percent of the voters the ability to block the will of the people, Richard A. Stoff writes.
The doctrine exists in Scotland, being of the civil law tradition, where it can operate as a rare form of repeal. In Scotland, non-use is not the same as desuetude. Disuse must be accompanied by other identifiable provisions that would make the enforcement of the statute inconsistent: neglect over such a period of time that it would appear that a contrary custom had developed; and that a ...
Dice v. Akron, Canton & Youngstown R. Co., 342 U.S. 359 (1952), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that federal court rules apply when an action is brought pursuant to a federal right and where the substance of a state's rules would necessarily have an adverse effect on the protection of an individual's rights under federal law.