Search for: "State v. Lively" Results 2101 - 2120 of 26,063
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Nov 2024, 9:56 pm by Frank Cranmer
Not quite “religion”, but… In Mrs C Fairbanks v Change Grow Live [2024] UKET 2409700/2023, Mrs Fairbanks had been employed by Change Grow Live (CGL), a charity, as a recovery worker based in Fleetwood from October 2022 until she was dismissed in July 2023. [read post]
26 Apr 2014, 2:34 pm by Stephen Bilkis
The court in considering the fair and proper sentence may look at offences which the defendant was not convicted for as stated in Williams v New York. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 8:17 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
  That many Native women live on tribal lands. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 1:00 am by Anita Davies
In the case preview for R v Gnango , it was suggested that the question facing the Supreme Court read like a particularly complex examination problem. [read post]
13 Oct 2010, 10:05 am by uwlegalscholarship
The University of Iowa College of Law invites submissions for a proposed symposium to mark the 25th anniversary of the United States Supreme Court’s landmark opinion in Batson v. [read post]
27 Jul 2012, 8:10 am by sally
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Standard Chartered Bank v Ceylon Petroleum Corporation [2012] EWCA Civ 1049 (27 July 2012) NB Algeria, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 1050 (27 July 2012) Alexander v Freshwater Properties Ltd & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 1048 (27 July 2012) Rossetti Marketing Ltd & Anor v Diamond Sofa Company Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 1021 (27 July 2012) High Court (Queen’s Bench… [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 1:07 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
Hearings in the Supreme Court are now shown live on the Court’s website. [read post]
27 Mar 2008, 8:25 am
In its appeal to the United States Supreme Court, Indiana v. [read post]
Related Issues: Mass Surveillance TechnologiesState Surveillance & Human RightsState-Sponsored MalwareRelated Cases: Kidane v. [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 2:35 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Finally, the Court concludes that the difference in treatment between children living in households with more than two children, and children living in households with that number of children or fewer, is justifiable. [read post]