Sentence examples for the statement at issue from inspiring English sources

The statement at issue appeared in an advertisement published in The New York Times in 1984.

Alternatively, if 'Cicero' is rigid, as is widely acknowledged, then in order for the statement at issue to be necessarily true, 'the organism descended from sperm s and egg e' must be rigid and so express an essence of Cicero.

The classical version of the statement at issue is due, independently, to Berry [1] and to Esseen [2], and it is condensed into the well-known inequality sup x ∈ R | F n ( x ) − G ( x ) | ≤ C m 3 σ 3 1 n (1).

"In the statement at issue (this piece of paper is white), in fact, not only is the being-white asserted alongside the being-white, but rather, the white as 'property' is also attributed to a 'thing', and, in so being, the being-white is determined more specifically.

And if 'the organism descended from sperm s and egg e' indeed expresses an essence of Cicero, it must designate just Cicero in all possible worlds, and hence rigidly: so, given that the statement at issue is necessarily true, 'Cicero' must be rigid, too.

The statement at issue: "Super PACs can be made illegal.

The statements at issue are fairly generic, the typical niceties issued by public companies about how much they value complying with the law.

The case raises a host of interesting questions, including whether the statements at issue are protected opinions and the potential applicability of Massachusetts' anti-SLAPP and retraction statutes.

A trial court denied defendant Walsh's motion to dismiss under the Citizen Participation Act, apparently because he made the statements at issue to a reporter and not to a government body.

"[A] court may decide as a matter of law whether a statement is actually capable of defamatory meaning". "Where no such meaning is possible, summary disposition is appropriate". Because the statements at issue in this case could not reasonably be interpreted as factual statements by or about Levitt, summary disposition in favor of defendant was appropriate.

She lost in a summary judgment because a court ruled in 2001 that "the statements at issue are not false".