Search for: "MATTER OF C M R" Results 2281 - 2300 of 2,967
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Jan 2011, 9:25 am by David Smith
In this case S and M were both tenants of Southwark. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 5:00 am by Don Cruse
As a threshold matter, the Court first discussed whether each was “an employee of a governmental unit” within the scope of § 101.106(f). [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 11:36 am by Michaela
 Some say no matter how well you think you did, you probably did worse. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 10:55 pm by Maria Roche
At first instance, Mr Justice Collins dismissed TTM’s claim holding that his detention had not been unlawful until such time as the court declared the decision-making process to have been defective – applying R v Managers of South Western Hospital ex p M [1993] QB 683 and R v Central London County Court ex p London [1999] QB 1260 and distinguishing Re S-C (Mental Patient Habeas Corpus) [1996] QB 599 as it was not directly concerned with that… [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 7:55 am
I’m also using $100 as the baseline cost per hour to simplify the math. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 7:23 am by Elie Mystal
It’s a mistake that’s so easy to avoid that I’m surprised to see it happen again. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:06 pm by NL
According to C, M also executed a will at this time leaving M's 50% of the property to C. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:06 pm by NL
According to C, M also executed a will at this time leaving M's 50% of the property to C. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:06 pm by NL
According to C, M also executed a will at this time leaving M's 50% of the property to C. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 4:30 am by Jim Dedman
You can still see that list here; I'm working on a new list for ABA TECHSHOW 2011 in April. [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 12:18 pm by Elie Mystal
I’m sure there will be something Cravath associates can point to that will allow them to pretend like they are still getting top of the market compensation. [read post]