Search for: "STATE v MILLER"
Results 2061 - 2080
of 5,892
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Dec 2016, 9:01 pm
Term Limits, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Dec 2016, 5:22 am
By Ronald Miller, J.D. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 10:57 am
Copyright * Goldstein v. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 1:32 pm
The Committee For Re-evaluation of the T-Line Loop, et al v. [read post]
24 Dec 2016, 6:50 am
In Smedley v Smedley, 2014 WL 11996390 (E.D. [read post]
21 Dec 2016, 8:30 am
Miller v. [read post]
19 Dec 2016, 8:36 am
California v. [read post]
19 Dec 2016, 6:56 am
If you’re curious about frivolous defenses and vexatious appeals, the case of Miller v Blue CrossBlue Shield Michigan, No: 326300, unpublished, is worth a read.The facts concern a denial of coverage by Blue Cross Blue Shield Michigan (BCBSM) for care provided to Francis Miller, who, after challenging the denial, petitioned the Washtenaw County Circuit Court to review the decision. [read post]
19 Dec 2016, 1:00 am
R (Miller & Dos Santos) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, heard 5-8 December 2016. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 2:30 pm
The case is Parker et al. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 2:30 pm
The case is Parker et al. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 7:35 am
Impact on the DOL By Ronald Miller, J.D. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 1:00 am
R (Miller & Dos Santos) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, heard 5-8 December 2016. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 6:19 am
By Ronald Miller, J.D. [read post]
8 Dec 2016, 1:30 am
Eadie QC: yes. 15.20 Eadie QC submits that Parliament set up a legislative scheme under the 1972 Act by way that actions by the UK Government and those of other member states flow back to affect member states. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 2:11 am
James Wolffe QC, now appears in support of the Respondents. 15.16 Lavery QC states that the will of Parliament should not overrule the will of the Irish people and that the triggering of article 50 without their consent would do just that. 15.14 Lavery QC says that Northern Ireland has a complex constitutional settlement that is legally binding as a result of section 1 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. 15.10 Lavery QC says that section 1 of the Northern Ireland Act… [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am
Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 3:40 pm
Mission Bay Alliance, et al. v. [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 1:51 pm
United States v. [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 6:55 am
In Smedley v Smedley, 2014 WL 11996390 (E.D. [read post]
