Search for: "Matter of Joseph O. v Danielle B."
Results 1 - 20
of 42
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 May 2024, 3:52 pm
For scholarly publications, Rule 10.7.1(d) adds a descriptive parenthetical note for citing cases where an enslaved person was involved, and provides examples like “Wall v. [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 8:30 am
Well done, BCA can favor major regulations, such as phasing out CFCs, reducing particulate matter air pollution, and sound climate policy.[12] The challenge is to get beyond “tunnel vision,”[13] and to counteract “disregard” of impacts and affected subgroups.[14]Assessing all important impacts helps overcome these cognitive limitations, and the “omitted voice” of underrepresented subgroups, by pressing policy makers to think more holistically and… [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 10:36 am
” 1 NIMMER ON COPYRIGHT § 2A.10(B) (2022 ed.). [read post]
6 Jul 2022, 7:02 am
(b) Allowing a copper mine to take over one of the most sacred sites of a religion? [read post]
13 Nov 2020, 12:05 pm
JOSEPH WILLIAM O'NEILL JR., Appellant, v. [read post]
15 Aug 2020, 4:29 am
It rejected Respondent’s reliance on Matter of Joseph O. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 10:51 am
Shannon Kathleen O’Byrne, Cindy A. [read post]
18 May 2018, 3:56 am
" eBay v. [read post]
2 Apr 2018, 7:12 am
Keegan v. [read post]
21 Mar 2018, 6:18 am
” In Matter of Joseph O. v Danielle B. ,2018 NY Slip Op 01192 (2d Dept., 2018) the Appellate Division, Second Department observed that it is an established legal presumption that every child born during a marriage is the legitimate child of both spouses (see Domestic Relations Law § 24[1]; Family Ct Act § 417) and that the respondents correctly contended that… [read post]
21 Mar 2018, 6:18 am
” In Matter of Joseph O. v Danielle B. ,2018 NY Slip Op 01192 (2d Dept., 2018) the Appellate Division, Second Department observed that it is an established legal presumption that every child born during a marriage is the legitimate child of both spouses (see Domestic Relations Law § 24[1]; Family Ct Act § 417) and that the respondents correctly contended that… [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 3:05 am
” SEC v. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 4:32 pm
Jaroslawicz v. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 1:08 pm
Team Members: Joseph Fortunato (3L), Sameer Ponkshe (3L) In this year’s competition titled United States v. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am
The first edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [Manual] was published in 1994, a year after the Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Daubert. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 4:26 am
Farah v. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
O’Rourke – Incoming Section Chair O’Melveny & Myers LLP - Los Angeles, CA Paul J. [read post]
11 Jul 2013, 6:19 pm
Resetting the Regulatory Context: From Command to Lineamientos 542 B. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
The other day, I was blogging about tags, and somebody asked what are all the tags. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 5:29 am
—Nathan McMurray | @LXBN - http://bit.ly/OHXKpt (Colin O'Keefe) Apple and Samsung take Australian Legal Battle to the 'Hot Tub' - http://bit.ly/PzKZft (Jane Wardell) Samsung: Apple Pushed Expert Witnesses to Change their Minds | Macworld - http://bit.ly/MrSLNS (Jeremy Kirk) Apple v. [read post]
