Search for: "JACKSON v. JACKSON" Results 2941 - 2960 of 8,677
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Jun 2019, 4:51 pm by INFORRM
The appeal Mr Kennedy appealed, arguing that the availability of forum non conveniens arguments was restricted where the Brussels Recast Regulation 2012/2015 (“Regulation”) applied and, further, that judicial discretion under section 49 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 was now heavily restricted, by virtue of the decision in Owusu v Jackson [2005] QB 801. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 9:15 am by Howard Wasserman
SCOTUS today decided Agency for Int'l Development v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 8:06 am by David Lat
United States, Benchslap, Benchslaps, campaign finance, Citizens United, Constitutional Law, Dan Diamond, Eighth Amendment, Election 2012, Election Law, Health Care, Health Care / Medicine, health care reform, Immigration, Jackson v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 8:06 am by David Lat
United States, Benchslap, Benchslaps, campaign finance, Citizens United, Constitutional Law, Dan Diamond, Eighth Amendment, Election 2012, Election Law, Health Care, Health Care / Medicine, health care reform, Immigration, Jackson v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 8:06 am by David Lat
United States, Benchslap, Benchslaps, campaign finance, Citizens United, Constitutional Law, Dan Diamond, Eighth Amendment, Election 2012, Election Law, Health Care, Health Care / Medicine, health care reform, Immigration, Jackson v. [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 10:45 am
Louisiana to overrule Michigan v. [read post]
26 Jan 2022, 5:00 am by Eric Segall
Indeed, Jackson’s concurrence may be the most important concurrence in the history of the Supreme Court. [read post]
22 May 2024, 5:30 am by Josh Blackman
And Justice Jackson recounted how the Reconstruction Congress used racial preferences for the freedmen. [read post]
19 Mar 2007, 2:26 pm
The Jackson Hole Star Tribune has this story on Wilkie v. [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
 * See McKee v Jackson, 152 AD2d 54, holding that a probationer is entitled to a minimum period of time to demonstrate his or her ability to successfully perform the duties of the position, and Gray v Bronx Developmental Center, 65 NY2d 904, holding that a probationer may be dismissed without notice and hearing after completing his or her minimum period of probation and prior to the expiration of his or her maximum period of probation. [read post]