Search for: "PARTY X v. PARTY Y"
Results 241 - 260
of 461
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Aug 2012, 12:00 am
However, as against this, it can be said that the word “may” is used because the clause contemplates two modes of service (service may be either by X method or by Y method). [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 9:05 pm
A check is a type of draft: a request from one party, X (the drawer), to X’s bank (the drawee bank) to pay a third party, Y (the payee). [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 9:09 pm
In other words, in a string of transactions from X to Y to Z, if X to Y is non-usurious, but Y to Z is usurious, can X shelter in Y's usury defense? [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 11:06 pm
Elle fait donc partie de la procédure.[...]VII. [read post]
21 May 2010, 8:13 pm
In the recent decision in Wilson v. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 11:34 am
WalMart (now called WalMart v. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 8:26 am
The tort of defamation requires the plaintiff to establish the following elements: That X made comments about Y that would tend to lower Y’s reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person; and That the comments were communicated to at least one person (other than Y). [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 9:01 pm
In King v. [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 12:01 pm
The Court considers that, while this case might not attain the seriousness of X and Y v. the Netherlands, where a breach of Article 8 arose from the lack of an effective criminal sanction for the rape of a handicapped girl, it cannot be treated as trivial. [read post]
19 Oct 2013, 8:53 pm
If the party against whom the statement was admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party may examine the declarant on the statement as if on cross-examination. [read post]
28 Jul 2015, 6:00 am
And I think this view is often echoed in the media coverage of trademark bullying cases, where we see the sentiment expressed time and time again that “there’s no way anybody is confused about X and Y. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 12:42 pm
”Defendant: “Regulation X also allowed us to do B. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 10:03 pm
Then I always get dubious looks when I say, "Officers can do X, Y but not Z. [read post]
30 Jan 2020, 10:24 am
[v] Here, we do not seek to describe the precise modalities of the IAAA,[vi] or explore its potential political effects. [read post]
14 May 2011, 1:46 pm
And here’s the President’s two penn’orth (X Y & X and Brian Morgan [2011] EWHC 1157 (Fam)). [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 4:35 am
Supreme Court's decision in Michigan v. [read post]
9 Dec 2013, 7:13 am
Cooper, in his November 29, 2013 opinion in Travis v. [read post]
6 Apr 2012, 12:49 am
Interestingly, Nollan v. [read post]
29 Aug 2021, 4:00 am
Elle y était victime d’intimidation. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 12:44 pm
Korn v. [read post]
