Search for: "Forester v. Forester" Results 1 - 20 of 3,759
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Jun 2024, 7:50 am by Evan George
Last summer, many Americans were glued to the events unfolding in Maui as a raging inferno overtook the town of Lahaina, trapping thousands and killing at least 99 people.    This summer, we’ll see 13 youth plaintiffs in Hawaiʻi take the state’s Department of Transportation to court for allegedly failing to implement climate policies meant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions—emissions that increase climate risks like last year’s Maui wildfires. [read post]
5 Jun 2024, 2:39 pm by Unknown
United States (Breach of Trust; National Indian Forest Resources Management Act) Gila River Indian Community, et al. v. [read post]
22 May 2024, 8:30 am by Unknown
S.4370 - A bill to amend the Tribal Forest Protection Act of 2004 to improve that Act, and for other purposes. [read post]
13 May 2024, 12:57 am by INFORRM
On Wednesday 8 May 2024, The Daily Mail apologised to Dale Vince, the green energy industrialist, environmental campaigner and co-owner of Forest Green Rovers, for defaming him in articles by Andrew Pierce published on the MailOnline on 17 March 2024 and in the print edition of The Daily Mail on 18 March 2024. [read post]
12 May 2024, 8:43 am by Giles Peaker
Bano, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Waltham Forest (2024) EWHC 654 (Admin) Waltham Forest owed Ms Bano the full housing duty. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]