Search for: "State v. J. P." Results 2081 - 2100 of 4,868
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Mar 2015, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
YXB v TNO, heard 26 February 2015, (Warby J). [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 2:55 am
However, last week’s High Court, England and Wales, ruling in Enterprise v Europcar [2015] EWHC 300 (Ch) shows this is by no means a settled area, explains katfriend Jeremy Blum(Bristows LLP).* The Richemont ruling and beyond: dealing with counterfeit websites and the intermediaries that host themKatfriend Tim Behean provides another insightful analysis of Cartier International AG and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others [2014] EWHC 3354… [read post]
22 Feb 2015, 6:50 pm
Three accounts were in trust for his daughter E, two for her children, V and P, one for his nephew J and one for his niece MY. [read post]
22 Feb 2015, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
On 20 February 2015, the Court of Appeal (McCombe and Sharp LJJ and Mitting J) gave judgment in the case of Rufus v Elliott ([2015] EWCA Civ 121). [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 7:35 pm by Daniel E. Cummins
February 5, 2015 Stevens, J.).In a thorough Opinion issued in the matter, Judge Stevens noted that the parties were in agreement that, in this state court action, the UIM breach of contract action was required to be decided by way of a jury trial and the bad faith claim via a bench trial.Arguing under the doctrine of judicial economy, the Plaintiffs asserted that they should be allowed to conduct discovery relative to all claims even before the breach of contract claim was tried. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 4:50 pm by INFORRM
At common law, the words “tendency”, “likely” and “calculated to” are used interchangeably in defining the test of defamatory (see, for instance, Tugendhat J in [29] on p 1994B and D of Thornton). [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Najera & Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, First Do No Harm: Protecting Patients Through Immunizing Health Care Workers, (February 8, 2015).Seval Yildirim, Conceptions of Religion in the Secular State: Evolving Turkish Secularism, (Pepperdine Law Review, Vol. 41, No. 1049, 2014).William P. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 1:21 pm
  The State’s suggestion, p. 18 pf the reply brief, that the statement’s “primary purpose” is not prosecutorial because it was informal should be rejected on grounds already indicated in Davis v. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 1:21 pm
  The State’s suggestion, p. 18 pf the reply brief, that the statement’s “primary purpose” is not prosecutorial because it was informal should be rejected on grounds already indicated in Davis v. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 6:15 am
The trial decision was recorded on this weblog under the title "Taking the p*** -- or merely retaining it? [read post]