Search for: "BARBER v. BARBER" Results 281 - 300 of 497
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Oct 2013, 1:43 pm
– 5:05 P.M.SESSION V (with coffee break 3:30-3:50)NYS CLE Credit: 2.0, Areas of Professional PracticeCommentators on proposals presented, and Q&A PeriodJane Ginsburg, ModeratorMorton L. [read post]
29 Aug 2009, 9:31 pm
" Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801 (5 June 2009) Related posts:Ontario: Jurisdiction and Family Law In Okmyansky v. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 8:05 am by emagraken
…(para. 20) Master Groves’ reasoning mirrors that of Master Barber in Wright v. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 7:34 am by Dave
In particular, the problem of Fry J's well-known five probanda in Willmott v Barber (1880) 15 Ch D 96, at 105, which has bedevilled this area in the past, is again at stake here because eg it was not known whether the Defendants' predecessor in title had made a mistake as to his legal rights (probanda 1). [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 7:34 am by Dave
In particular, the problem of Fry J's well-known five probanda in Willmott v Barber (1880) 15 Ch D 96, at 105, which has bedevilled this area in the past, is again at stake here because eg it was not known whether the Defendants' predecessor in title had made a mistake as to his legal rights (probanda 1). [read post]
30 Apr 2010, 4:22 pm by NL
Following Central Bedfordshire Council v Taylor [2010] 1 WLR 446 and Barber v Croydon LBC[2010] EWCA Civ 51 (and contra Doran v Liverpool CC [2009] 1 WLR 2365), at issue is a series of decisions, from deciding to serve notice through to enforcement of a warrant. [read post]
30 Apr 2010, 4:22 pm by NL
Following Central Bedfordshire Council v Taylor [2010] 1 WLR 446 and Barber v Croydon LBC[2010] EWCA Civ 51 (and contra Doran v Liverpool CC [2009] 1 WLR 2365), at issue is a series of decisions, from deciding to serve notice through to enforcement of a warrant. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 2:05 pm by Eric Schweibenz
On March 10, 2011, the Federal Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments in Tianrui Group Co. v. [read post]