Search for: "BISHOP v. STATE" Results 281 - 300 of 951
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Mar 2018, 4:00 am by J. Francisco Lobo
Further, Ruys contends that the International Court of Justice itself has “implicitly” endorsed the doctrine in the Nicaragua, Oil Platforms, and Democratic Republic of the Congo v. [read post]
13 Mar 2018, 4:12 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Plaintiff’s equivocal denial of knowledge of the terms of the settlement is flatly contradicted by the clear terms of the settlement agreement (see Bishop v Maurer, 33 AD3d 497, 499 [1st Dept 2006], affd 9 NY3d 910 [2007]). [read post]
15 Feb 2018, 4:20 am by Edith Roberts
The spotlight stays on the high-profile union-fees case that will be argued this month, Janus v. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
The Bishops Conference stated that “the degrading and distortion of religious symbols by purposely changing their meaning is contrary to public morals, especially when it is done in pursuit of commercial gain”. [read post]
31 Jan 2018, 12:04 pm
This is essentially the issue that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) had to address in Sekmadienis v Lithuania (Appl No 69317/14). [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 5:00 am by Anonymous
Svantesson Panelists: Amy Keating - Senior Legal Director, Twitter Uta Kohl - Senior Lecturer, Aberystwyth School of Law, Aberystwyth University Lea Bishop Shaver - Professor of Law at Indiana University Robert H. [read post]
24 Jan 2018, 3:24 am
”A series of serious crimes widely described as “heinous” occurred in 1993 during the administration of President Fidel V. [read post]
17 Jan 2018, 10:49 am by Native American Rights Fund
United States Department of the Interior (Gaming; Land into Trust)Ak-Chin Indian Community v. [read post]
17 Jan 2018, 10:49 am by Native American Rights Fund
United States Department of the Interior (Gaming; Land into Trust)Ak-Chin Indian Community v. [read post]
14 Dec 2017, 6:35 am by Dan Carvajal
The Supreme Court’s 1992 Quill Corp. v. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 4:25 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Plaintiff’s equivocal denial of knowledge of the terms of the settlement is flatly contradicted by the clear terms of the settlement agreement (see Bishop v Maurer, 33 AD3d 497, 499 [1st Dept 2006], affd 9 NY3d 910 [2007]). [read post]