Search for: "Wilson v. Parkes" Results 281 - 300 of 343
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Sep 2010, 3:08 pm by Anna Christensen
§ 1681t, preempts a California statute that creates a private damages remedy for violations of state law with respect to the obligations of furnishers of information to CRAs.Certiorari-Stage Documents:Opinion below (9th Circuit)Petition for certiorariBrief in oppositionPetitioner's replyAmicus brief for the American Bankers Association et al.Amicus brief for the California Apartment AssociationAmicus brief for the Consumer Data Industry Association Title: Wilson v. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 9:28 am by Meg Martin
Longfield, of Law Offices of Jerry Bosch, LLC, Wilson, Wyoming.Representing State DOT: Bruce A. [read post]
11 Aug 2010, 6:05 am by Alfred Brophy
Park's lengthy list of note topics. [read post]
11 Jul 2010, 10:50 am by NL
London Borough of Brent v Corcoran & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 774 While we wait for the Supreme Court decision in Pinnock, which was heard last week, it seems that the Court of Appeal is determined to set practical limits on the operation of the public law defence. [read post]
11 Jul 2010, 10:50 am by NL
London Borough of Brent v Corcoran & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 774 While we wait for the Supreme Court decision in Pinnock, which was heard last week, it seems that the Court of Appeal is determined to set practical limits on the operation of the public law defence. [read post]
25 Apr 2010, 4:27 pm by Anthony J. Vecchio
§§ 2C:18-2(a), 2C:5-1(a), because the arrestee fit the description of a reported burglary suspect, he was positively identified by an eyewitness to the attempted burglary of a car, he was standing near the parking lot where the attempted burglary occurred, he was uncooperative during the officers' investigatory stop, and he continued to be uncooperative during the booking process, which impaired the officers' ability to obtain clear fingerprints from him. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 3:44 am by Russ Bensing
  The very next day, the Supreme Court, in Wilson v. [read post]