Search for: "Mitchell v. Mitchell"
Results 2801 - 2820
of 3,054
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Sep 2016, 5:00 am
Mitchell Pickerill points out that when asking whether the Roberts Court is “pro-business” we must also consider what we would expect from this, or any court. [read post]
8 Aug 2024, 6:30 am
Sherwin, Gambling with Armageddon: Nuclear Roulette from Hiroshima to the Cuban Missile Crisis (Knopf, 2020).February 7, 2021Balkinization Symposium on Mary Ziegler, Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 6:39 pm
U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, November 10, 2008 US v. [read post]
15 Jan 2008, 3:06 am
filed 04/04/07 closed 12/10/07 1:07-cv-01891 Mitchell v. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 1:41 pm
Strangelove" (16) "Flight of the Conchords" (4) "Game Change" (2) "Get Smart" (1) "Gran Torino" (10) "Grey Gardens" (13) "I Shouldn't Be Alive" (4) "Limelight" (3) "Meet the Press" (20) "Moby Dick" (5) "My Dinner with Andre" (34) "Mystery Science Theater" (2) "Project Runway" (78) "Romy and Michele's High School Reunion" (3) "Seinfeld" (72) "Sex and the City" (14) "Slacker" (11) "Slumdog Millionaire" (16) "SNL" (60) "Sopranos" (50) "South Park" (71) "Star Trek" (12) "Star Wars" (25) "Survivor" (50)… [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 11:57 am
Titanic v. [read post]
14 Jun 2009, 9:08 pm
Mitchell, 709 F.2d 51, 64 (D.C. [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 12:12 pm
IPSO 10382-22 Mitchell v The Sentinel, 1 Accuracy (2021), Breach – sanction: action as offered by publication Satisfactory Remedy – 10512-22 Bavister v cornwalllive.com, 1 Accuracy (2021), Resolved – satisfactory remedy 01732-22 Rahman v Mail Online, 1 Accuracy (2021), 2 Privacy (2021), 3 Harassment (2021), 12 Discrimination (2021), No breach – after investigation 00627-22 Doe v You (The Mail on Sunday), 2 Privacy (2021), No breach… [read post]
29 Jan 2012, 12:00 pm
Para 53.4 of the Practice Direction to Rule 48 states:It is appropriate for the court to make a wasted costs order against a legal representative, only if – (1)the legal representative has acted improperly, unreasonably or negligently; (2)his conduct has caused a party to incur unnecessary costs, and (3)it is just in all the circumstances to order him to compensate that party for the whole or part of those costs.The notes to the PD in the White Book raise Saif Ali v Sydney… [read post]
11 Sep 2022, 8:40 pm
In Hudson v. [read post]
29 Jan 2012, 12:00 pm
Para 53.4 of the Practice Direction to Rule 48 states:It is appropriate for the court to make a wasted costs order against a legal representative, only if – (1)the legal representative has acted improperly, unreasonably or negligently; (2)his conduct has caused a party to incur unnecessary costs, and (3)it is just in all the circumstances to order him to compensate that party for the whole or part of those costs.The notes to the PD in the White Book raise Saif Ali v Sydney… [read post]
6 Nov 2022, 1:09 am
Mitchell Skilling, Scottish Legal News: Glasgow sheriff orders SSE Hydro operators to pay nearly £100,000 to organisers of cancelled evangelical Christian event: another take on Billy Graham Evangelistic Association v Scottish Event Campus Ltd. [read post]
11 Apr 2007, 10:32 am
In a pre-Hague Convention case, the Georgia Supreme Court, in Mitchell v. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 2:25 pm
Coicou v. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 12:07 pm
TianRui v. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 12:07 pm
TianRui v. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 9:59 am
Funk v. [read post]
29 Mar 2021, 7:10 pm
Although no rule or statute prohibits side switching, state and federal courts have exercised what they have called an inherent power to supervise and control ethical breaches by lawyers and expert witnesses.[1] The Wang Test Although certainly not the first case on side-switching, the decision of a federal trial court, in Wang Laboratories, Inc. v Toshiba Corp., has become a key precedent on disqualification of expert witnesses.[2] The test spelled out in the Wang case has generally been… [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 9:35 am
See State v. [read post]
28 Oct 2022, 10:01 am
In Tatel v. [read post]
