Search for: "Matter of C. F. v C. M."
Results 181 - 200
of 1,375
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Mar 2022, 1:33 pm
Cal.) in Crowley v. [read post]
26 Feb 2022, 8:51 am
The M/Y Johanny, 36 F.3d 136, 141 n.6 (1st Cir. 1994) (quoting James W. [read post]
24 Feb 2022, 9:15 am
Club de l’Ouest de la Fr., 245 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. [read post]
18 Feb 2022, 7:54 am
The Supreme Court rejected Nixon’s challenge in Nixon v. [read post]
25 Jan 2022, 2:46 pm
In Ross v. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 3:15 am
I’m not going to set it all out here but the core part (from section 1) is this : (3) Behaviour is “abusive” if it consists of any of the following— (a) physical or sexual abuse; (b) violent or threatening behaviour; (c) controlling or coercive behaviour; (d) economic abuse (see subsection (4)); (e) psychological, emotional or other abuse; and it does not matter whether the behaviour consists of a single incident or a course of conduct. [read post]
18 Jan 2022, 10:02 am
In doing so, the court cites to a prior ruling in the JB case, before the JB court reconsidered the matter and reversed its position. [read post]
18 Jan 2022, 5:01 am
In others, the matter is unsettled. [read post]
16 Jan 2022, 10:30 pm
I’m the last of the ADA bloggers to discuss Laufer v Looper, 21-1031, 2022 WL 39072, at *6 (10th Cir. [read post]
14 Jan 2022, 9:14 am
" In Board of Ed. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2022, 1:16 pm
The signalling is clear in the concurrence:çWhy does the major questions doctrine matter? [read post]
11 Jan 2022, 9:01 pm
You think you can prevent my candidate from joining the Court and reversing Roe v. [read post]
5 Jan 2022, 5:01 am
As my article notes, courts do make exceptions to the litigate-in-your-own-name rule, and there are plausible arguments that pseudonymous litigation should be more commonly allowed; but this is still a good articulation of the dominant view: Pilots X, Y, Z, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, & M sued Boeing about its 737 MAX airplanes. [read post]
20 Dec 2021, 5:01 am
From State v. [read post]
17 Dec 2021, 1:50 pm
I'm skeptical that the judicial process is likely to lead to reliable results in cases such as this. [1] Doe v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 1:31 pm
I’m not aware of any associated perjury prosecutions in the last 23 years, even though I’m sure prosecutors could find violations if they looked hard enough. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 2:32 pm
M. v. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 2:34 am
This Week In the Supreme Court – w/c 13th December 2021 Hearings in the Supreme Court are now shown live on the Court’s website. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 2:22 pm
Litig., 858 F.3d 787, 793 (3d Cir. 2017) (affirming exclusion of causation expert witness) Magistrini v. [read post]
10 Dec 2021, 11:16 am
See TPC §§ 71.0021(b),(c). [read post]
