Search for: "Quality Courts United v. Quality Courts"
Results 261 - 280
of 4,139
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Apr 2023, 10:43 am
On April 10, in People of California v. [read post]
16 Apr 2023, 12:37 am
Revd Paul Williamson in court again In July 1997, the Revd Paul Williamson was made the subject of a Civil Proceedings Order as a vexatious litigant pursuant to s.42(1A) Senior Courts Act 1981 (Restriction of vexatious legal proceedings), primarily as a result of a series of proceedings arising from his opposition to the ordination of women: see R v HM Attorney-General ex parte Reverend Paul Stewart Williamson [1997] EWHC Admin 691. [read post]
16 Apr 2023, 12:19 am
Co. v. [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 2:29 pm
Click here for a full PDF copy of the Abi-Aad v. [read post]
13 Apr 2023, 7:11 am
" United States v. [read post]
12 Apr 2023, 8:59 am
Recently, a Federal Judge in Pennsylvania decided a Motion To Dismiss in favor of the Government in the case of United States v American Health, et al. [read post]
One of the Stiffest Charges Against Jan. 6 Insurrectionists Hangs on by a Thread in the D.C. Circuit
11 Apr 2023, 5:01 am
Although the dissenting opinion cites Bond v. [read post]
8 Apr 2023, 5:41 am
” Similarly, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida in Lucky Cousins Trucking, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 5:00 am
United States, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution compels a change of venue in some cases. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 3:12 am
Cal.Implications for sanctions motion in United States et al. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 1:46 pm
In Intel v. [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 1:25 pm
Eshelby v. [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 7:05 am
After the Supreme Court decided California v. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 1:04 pm
” The court cited with approval a similar case ruled upon last year: We find persuasive the reasoning and holding of our sibling court in Air Quality Experts Corp. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 7:51 am
Commissioner,[28] the court found that the taxpayer was violating the no private benefits provision when it primarily served one political party over the other, and the evidence lacked in trying to be nonpartisan. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 1:09 pm
Pacific Palisades Residents Association, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Mar 2023, 9:00 pm
Two such courts are the Southern District of Ohio in M.A. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2023, 5:06 pm
However, on February 22, 2023, the United States Supreme Court, in its 6-3 decision in Helix Energy Solution Group, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 3:00 am
County of Mono v. [read post]
