Practice and Procedure.
1) The University shall evaluate the performance of staff members once per year after the staff member has successfully completed their probationary period. The University shall ensure that at least two performance evaluations are conducted during the staff member’s probationary period, prior to the final month of probation.
2) Following a performance evaluation, a record will be made of the meeting and discussion outcomes by the supervisor, which the supervisor and the employee shall sign as a record of the meeting. The employee’s signature does not indicate their agreement with statements made in the record. This record will be placed in the employee file located in the employee’s work unit. This record will be available for review by the employee.
3) If the employee does not agree with the evaluation, the employee may follow Article 6.3
Practice and Procedure. Format for Briefs
Practice and Procedure. Length of Pleadings
1. In a recent Report and Order in Docket 20626, we stated that “ plead ings in excess of the prescribed length because of appendices and other * * * attachments will be returned without consideration.” (58 FCC 2d 865, at para. 36). However, we failed to amend the pertinent provision of the rules (§ 1.48 (a) ), which reads as follows :
( a ) Affidavits, statements, and other materials which are submitted with and factually support a pleading are not counted in determining the length of the pleading. Other materials submitted with the pleading will be disregarded.
2. The amended rule is set out in the attached Appendix. Authority for the amendment is contained in sections 4 (i) and ( j ) and 303(r) of the Com munications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(1) and ( j ) and 303(r). Be cause the amendment involves a matter of procedure, compliance with the prior notice and effective date provisions of
Practice and Procedure. Finally, unless stated otherwise, a settlement of any particular issue in this proceeding is without prejudice to the positions parties might take with respect to the same issue in future proceedings, unless explicitly stated otherwise. The parties agree that all positions, negotiations and discussion of any kind whatsoever that took place during the Settlement Conference and all documents exchanged during the conference that were prepared to facilitate settlement discussions are strictly confidential and without prejudice, and inadmissible unless relevant to the resolution of any ambiguity that subsequently arises with respect to the interpretation of any provision of this Settlement Agreement. It is fundamental to the agreement of the parties that none of the provisions of this Settlement Agreement are severable. If the Board does not, prior to the commencement of the hearing of the evidence in this proceeding, accept the provisions of the Settlement Agreement in their entirety, there is no Settlement Agreement (unless the parties agree that any portion of the Settlement Agreement that the Board does accept may continue as a valid Settlement Agreement). Through the Settlement Conference, and as set out in this Settlement Agreement, the parties (except for the open bill issue participants, who take no position on any issue except for D11) have reached agreement on 53 of the 56 issues in Enbridge’s 2013 rate rebasing application (referred to herein as the “Settled Issues”). The overall impact of the Settled Issues is to reduce the revenue deficiency from the as-filed amount of $92.9 million (Exhibit M2, Tab 1, Schedule 2) to an amount of approximately $17.9 million. The revenue requirement and deficiency impact of the Settled Issues are set out in the ADR Financial Statements attached to this Settlement Agreement as Appendix A (Exhibit N1, Tab1, Schedule 1, Appendix A, part 1). As noted above, all parties agree that the Settled Issues are a package. This means that none of the components of the Settlement Agreement should be considered in isolation, but instead they should be considered as a complete package. All parties agree that the package of Settled Issues represents a fair and reasonable agreement that is in the public interest. There are three outstanding issues (the “Unsettled Issues”). One of these Unsettled Issues, relating to the Open Bill Access Program (Issue D11), is listed as “Partially Settled” because the aspects of the issue with ratemaki...
Practice and Procedure. Injunction-Application for injunction to restrain Mortgagee’s exercise of its power of sale contained in a mortgage- Whether Mortgagee may be restrained-Whether damages is an adequate remedy-Section 106 of The Registration of Titles Act- Limitation of Actions Act. Evidence – Use of without prejudice communication.
Practice and Procedure of not more than 30 days without further authority from the Commission, Pro vided, That notification is sent to the Commission in Washington, D.C. not less than the 10th day of the lower power operation. In the event normal power is restored prior to the expiration of the 30 day period, the permittee or licensee will so notify the Commission in Wash ington, D.C. of this date. If causes beyond the control of the permittee or licensee
(1) Section 73.603(a) is amended to
Practice and Procedure. He writes the column A Global View for the Journal of Tax Practice and Procedure. INCOME AND ESTATE TAX TREATIES1 Xxxx and Xxxx are a married couple, both US citizens. They both move from Washington, DC, to Geneva, Switzerland, where Xxxx works as a manager at UBS, and Xxxx works in his own business. They have a daughter, Xxxxxxxx, who lives in Bethesda, Maryland. The couple keeps the following assets in the US: A single family home in Washington, DC: USD 4m A corporation, valued at USD 1m Retirement plan accounts: 401(k): USD 1m Xxxx XXX: USD 1m Securities portfolio at Fidelity: USD 10m Retirement plan accounts: 401(k): USD 1m Xxxx XXX: USD 1m Xxxx and Xxxx acquire the following assets in Switzerland: 50% interest in a single family home in Geneva: CHF 2m A société à responsabilité limitée (sàrl) valued at CHF 1m Retirement account: CHF 1m 50% interest in a single family home in Geneva: CHF 2m Securities portfolio at UBS: CHF 1m Retirement account: CHF 1m General Considerations2 Individuals are considered unlimited tax residents in Switzerland if they take up legal residence in Switzerland or if they reside there longer than 90 days without working, or longer than 30 days while working. In addition, individuals who do not fulfill the above criteria and are thus not considered limited tax residents are nonetheless subject to Swiss income taxes for income derived from (among other things): Interest in Swiss real estate; Interest in Swiss partnerships; Business income attributable to a Swiss permanent establishment or fixed place of business; and Professional practice in Switzerland. Switzerland does not levy a federal-level estate, gift, or inheritance tax. Individual cantons are entitled to levy gift and inheritance taxes. Accordingly, taxation depends on (1) whether Xxxx and Xxxx are unlimited tax residents in Switzerland and (2) the canton in which Xxxx and Xxxx reside at the time they make a gift (for gift tax) or on their date of death (for inheritance tax) or on the canton in which the particular asset is situated. Part One: TAXATION of US ASSETS while the couple lives in SWITZERLAND As US citizens, Xxxx and Xxxx are subject to US income tax on their worldwide income, regardless of source. Similarly, Swiss residents are generally subject to Swiss federal and cantonal income tax on their worldwide income. The provisions of the US-Switzerland Income Tax Treaty (“Treaty”) may modify the US income tax rules contained in the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”)....
Practice and Procedure. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: 155, 225, 303(r), 309, and 325(e).
Section 1. 1307 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4) and removing the note to paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
§ 1. 1307 Actions that may have a significant environmental effect, for which Environmental Assessments (EAs) must be prepared.
Practice and Procedure. Seduction — Whether cause of action lies in woman seduced. The plaintiff and the defendant are both descendants of Indian immigrants. The former was twenty-two years old at the date of the trial and the latter was bom on 4th January, 1949. The plaintiff claimed that on the 26th December, 1966 she and the defendant had agreed to marry, but that the latter repudiated that agree- ment on the 27th March, 1967. She also claimed that the day before i.e., the 26th March, he had seduced her. In the result she filed the present action claiming dam- ages for breach of promise and seduction. Counsel for the defendant submitted in limine that neither action was maintainable.
Practice and Procedure. 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 79 et seq.; 47 U.S.C.
2. In § 1.47, revise paragraph (h) to read as follows:
