Search for: "SMITH v ESTATE OF SMITH" Results 181 - 200 of 1,090
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Dec 2019, 2:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (on the application of Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster & Ors) v North Yorkshire County Council, heard 3 December 2019 MacDonald & Anor v Cambroe Estates Ltd (Scotland), heard 4 December 2019 AM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 4-5 December 2019. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 1:10 pm by sydniemery
Gonzalez’s article The New Batson: Opening the Door of the Jury Deliberation Room After Peña-Rodriguez v. [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 2:30 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
MacDonald & Anor v Carnbroe Estates Ltd (Scotland), heard 2 May 2019. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 3:00 am by Jeff Welty
(For more information about this type of property, see this paper by my colleague Meredith Smith, an expert in trusts and estates who helped me with this post.) [read post]
17 Oct 2019, 11:47 am by Kang Haggerty & Fetbroyt LLC
Eventually, after Smith had already passed away, the Supreme Court ruled that her estate was not entitled to the first, larger award it had been granted before. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 3:00 am by Robert Kreisman
The Winstons filed a lawsuit against the Estate of Jones and Smith, as well as the City of Chicago, and the two police officers. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 4:30 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
(See e.g., Leff v Fulbright & aworski, L.L.P., 78 AD3d 531, 533 [1st Dept 2010], lv denied 17 NY3d 705 [2011] [damages in malpractice case “grossly speculative” where plaintiff could not establish what would have occurred but for defendants’ conduct]; Phillips-Smith Specialty Retail Grp. [read post]
5 Sep 2019, 1:55 pm by sydniemery
Catherine Martin Christopher, Nevertheless She Persisted: Comparing Roe v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 7:12 am by John Elwood
Smith; and (3) whether the Supreme Court should reaffirm Smith’s hybrid-rights doctrine, applying strict scrutiny to free exercise claims that implicate other fundamental rights, and resolve the circuit split over the doctrine’s precedential status. [read post]