Xxxxxxxx, N. V., a company incorporated in The Netherlands (registered number 33250021) whose registered office is at Xxxxxxxxxxxxx 00, 0000 XX Xxxxxxxxx Zuidoost, The Netherlands (the Parent);
Xxxxxxxx, N. R., 2011.
Xxxxxxxx, N. V. represents and warrants for the benefit of the others as follows:
Xxxxxxxx, N. J.E.A. convention days, or the school recesses for Thanksgiving, December Recess, Winter Recess, and Spring Recess as presently established shall not be designated as staff development days. No more than two (2) consecutive days may be designated as staff development days.
Xxxxxxxx, N. 1651. The history of generation, examining the several opinions of divers authors, especially that of Xxx Xxxxxx Xxxxx, in his discourse of bodies. London: Xxxx Xxxxxx. Xxxx, N. 1601. De philosophia epicurea, democritica, theophrastica, proposita simpliciter, non edocta. Paris: X. Xxxxxxx. Xxxxx, X. 1665. Micrographia, or some physiological descriptions of minute bodies made by magnifying glasses. London: Martyn & Allestry. Xxxxxx, X. 1611. Strena seu de nive sexangula. Frankfurt am Main: Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx. Xxxxxxxx, A. 1607. Alchymia triumphans: Xxxxxxx. Xxxxxx, X.X. 1646. Democritus reviviscens, sive, de atomis. Pavia: Magrius. Xxxxxxx, X. 1571. Discussionum peripateticarum libri XIII. Venice: De Franciscis. Xxxxxxx, X. 1581. Discussionum peripateticarum tomi quattuor. Basel: Xxxxx.
Xxxxxxxx, N. A., et al., No. 09-CV-02079-JW (N.D. Cal.), provided, however, Settled Defense Claims shall not include any claim arising out of the violation, nonperformance, or breach of this Agreement.
Xxxxxxxx, N. A., et al., United States District 10 Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 09-CV02079
Xxxxxxxx, N. A., et al., Case No. 09-CV-2079-JW; (2) your full name and current address; (3) a clear statement of intention to exclude yourself such as “I wish to be excluded from the Wave IV Settlement”; (4) the addresses of your relinquished and replacement properties; (5) the amount of money you lost; and (6) your signature and the date you signed the request. Requests for exclusions must be postmarked 1st Class Mail no later than March 3, 2012 and sent to: United States District Court for the Northern District of California Re: Hunter v. Citibank Litigation c/o Hollister & Xxxxx, P.O. Box 630, Santa Barbara, CA 93102
Xxxxxxxx, N. A., et al., Case No. 09-CV-2079-JW; (2) your full name and current address; (3) a clear statement of why you object; (4) the addresses of your relinquished and replacement properties; (5) the amount of money you lost; and (6) your signature and the date you signed the objection. Objections must be postmarked 1st Class Mail no later than March 3, 2012 and mailed to all of the below: Clerk of the Court United States District Court for the Northern District of California, United States Courthouse, 000 Xxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxx, Xxx Xxxxxxxxx, XX 00000 Xxxxxx X. Xxxxx Xxxxxxx X. Denver Hollister & Brace P.O. Box 630, Santa Barbara, CA 93102
Xxxxxxxx, N. C. App. , S.E.2d (Aug. 1, 2017). (1) The evidence was insufficient to support a conviction under G.S. 14-208.18(a)(1), for being a sex offender on the premises of a daycare. The defendant was seen in a parking lot of a strip mall containing a daycare, other businesses, and a restaurant. Next-door to the daycare was a hair salon; next to the hair salon was a tax business. The three businesses shared a single building as well as a common parking lot. A restaurant in a separate, freestanding building shared the same parking lot. None of the spaces in the parking lot were specifically reserved or marked as intended for the daycare. The daycare, including its playground area, was surrounded by a chain-link fence. The court agreed with the defendant that the State failed to present sufficient evidence that the shared parking lot was part of the premises of the daycare. It stated: “[T]he shared parking lot is located on premises that are not intended primarily for the use, care, or supervision of minors. Therefore, we conclude that a parking lot shared with other businesses (especially with no designation(s) that certain spaces “belong” to a particular business) cannot constitute “premises” as set forth in subsection (a)(1) of the statute.” (2) The defendant’s guilty plea to unlawfully being within 300 feet of a daycare must be vacated in light of a Fourth Circuit’s decision holding G.S. 14-208.18(a)(2) to be unconstitutional. The defendant was indicted and pled guilty to violating G.S. 14-208.18(a)(2), which prohibits certain persons from being within 300 feet a location intended primarily for the use, care, or supervision of minors. While his direct appeal was pending, the Fourth Circuit held that statute to be unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the First Amendment. Thus the conviction must be vacated.
