Search for: "Burns v Burns"
Results 2101 - 2120
of 4,517
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Dec 2011, 9:56 am
#1 — DiCosolo v. [read post]
1 May 2015, 3:00 am
Okay, most Americans are following the same-sex marriage case, Obergefell v. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 3:35 pm
In Sarei v. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 10:09 am
[Post by Venkat Balasubramani, with comments from Eric] Mendenhall v. [read post]
21 Aug 2019, 10:07 am
Facts: This case (Reynolds v. [read post]
27 Sep 2016, 8:28 am
In the case Parr v. [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 4:01 am
These are the questions that have sparked a short and thought-provoking decision from SDNY Judge Marrero in United States v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 5:08 am
As reported by the New Jersey Law Journal, the New Jersey Supreme Court recently clarified the meaning of the term “undesigned and unexpected” event as it pertains to qualifying for accidental disability retirement benefits for a mental disability in the case of Mount v. [read post]
26 Feb 2013, 7:53 am
In last week’s case (Hood v. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 4:35 pm
In Freedman v. [read post]
25 Oct 2007, 11:16 pm
Last Best Beef, LLC v. [read post]
12 Jan 2010, 3:19 pm
In today’s case (Gregory v. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 7:27 am
The explosion caused Dukes to suffer severe burns and she spent three days in the hospital. [read post]
4 Sep 2015, 11:48 am
See Arthur Andersen LLP v. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 4:50 am
El Paso Marketing, LP v. [read post]
30 Dec 2024, 4:16 am
In Held et al v. [read post]
26 Apr 2025, 8:00 am
Notable Nonprofit Posts, Articles, & Other Resources: Myth v. [read post]
27 Sep 2016, 8:28 am
In the case Parr v. [read post]
1 Jan 2016, 9:35 am
The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department in Montenegro v P12, LLC, 2015 NY Slip Op 05919 [130 AD3d 695] reversed a lower court’s decision granting a defendant’s motion for summary judgment to dismiss a cause of action alleging a violation of Labor Law § 241(6), predicated on 12 NYCRR 23-1.8(a). [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 11:44 am
Facts: This case (Marland et al v. [read post]