Search for: "Madrigal v. Madrigal" Results 1 - 20 of 39
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Nov 2023, 7:07 am
 Pix Credit: Female Disciples of Sui Yuan, Handscroll You Zhao and Wang Gong; Qing Period 18th C; Shanghai Museum of ArtOn 31 October, a number of UN Special Procedures signed onto and made available a "Policy position by United Nations Special Procedures mandate holders in relation to the protection of human rights in sport without discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics. [read post]
10 Jul 2023, 12:47 pm
This seems entirely fair and reasonable.A guy gets out of a van (with some other guys) and allegedly stabs and kills the victim. [read post]
20 Feb 2023, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Heriot & Dan Morenoff, Brief of the American Civil Rights Project as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellee and Affirmance in Tennessee v. [read post]
3 Feb 2021, 5:53 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The Appellate Division, First, Department has upheld a racial discrimination verdict, determining that the plaintiff is entitled to a total of $2.5 million for pain and suffering resulting from the hostile work environment, retaliatory termination for complaining about the harassment, and a civil battery that took place at work.The case is Madrigal v. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 10:06 am by Maya Manian
 On the other side of the country and during the same era as Relf, the case of Madrigal v. [read post]
28 Sep 2020, 11:45 am by Comunicaciones_MJ
Mónica Rodríguez Madrigal Registradores de la Propiedad Lcdo. [read post]
17 Feb 2017, 8:50 am by Joel R. Brandes
In Madrigal v Tellez, ______F3d_____, (5th Cir., 2017) Jorge Carlos Vergara Madrigal (Vergara) and Angelica Fuentes Tellez (Fuentes) were the parents of two young daughters, ages five and three years. [read post]
19 Sep 2016, 10:34 am by Law Offices of David L. Freidberg, P.C.
In the People v Madrigal, No 110194, 2011 WL 1074427 (Ill Sup Ct), the defendant successfully convinced the Illinois Supreme court that the law had become an unfair burden. [read post]