Search for: "Tenant v. State"
Results 2121 - 2140
of 3,367
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Dec 2011, 2:46 pm
Servicers may have responsibilities, as described above, under the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act or other applicable state law requirements that provide protections to tenants from eviction on the properties they are renting as a result of foreclosure. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 1:40 pm
—Austin 1994, no writ) (stating that an owner of a non-possessory interest cannot compel partition). [read post]
13 Dec 2011, 11:22 am
State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1973 SC 2701; and Ranjit Thakur v. [read post]
11 Dec 2011, 4:53 pm
In the case of Hermida v. [read post]
11 Dec 2011, 2:01 am
To that list, the brief could have added the gas station rent control measure in Lingle v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 1:34 pm
Minter v Mole Valley District Council was heard by DJ George on 25th May 2011 and it was reported in the papers here. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 1:34 pm
Minter v Mole Valley District Council was heard by DJ George on 25th May 2011 and it was reported in the papers here. [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 11:15 am
State Bar 19 Cal. 3d 359 (1977) and Bates v. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 2:48 am
In this Landlord-Tenant case, one might say it went viral. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 2:07 am
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Payne & Anor, heard 4 November 2011. [read post]
4 Dec 2011, 6:58 am
In Lewis Operating Corp. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 2:26 pm
Next, we have s.124: (1) Where a notice under s. 122 (…) has been served by the tenant, the landlord shall, unless the notice is withdrawn, serve on the tenant … a written notice either - (a) admitting his right, or (b) denying it and stating the reasons why, in the opinion of the landlord, the tenant does not have the right to buy. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 2:26 pm
Next, we have s.124: (1) Where a notice under s. 122 (…) has been served by the tenant, the landlord shall, unless the notice is withdrawn, serve on the tenant … a written notice either - (a) admitting his right, or (b) denying it and stating the reasons why, in the opinion of the landlord, the tenant does not have the right to buy. [read post]
24 Nov 2011, 7:51 am
Applying Stack and Oxley v Hiscock [2004] EWCA Civ 546, the judge at first instance accepted this contention, stating that he had to consider what was just and fair between the parties having regard to the whole course of dealing between them. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 11:02 am
Rodriguez v. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 5:00 pm
See Rice v. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 6:12 pm
V. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 4:08 am
As support for their argument, the Defendants pointed to Wilson v. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 11:08 pm
My research for the upcoming presentation brought to my attention the case law of Bankway Properties Ltd v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 7:19 pm
United States Postal Service, No. 09-1964San Francisco v. [read post]
