Search for: "V D"
Results 3341 - 3360
of 76,321
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jan 2010, 1:32 pm
Office of Personnel Management [No. 1:09-cv-10309-JLT, (U.S.Dist.Ct., D. [read post]
16 Jun 2011, 2:19 am
BG v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 1478 (Admin); [2011] WLR (D) 192 “On an appeal under section 10(1)(4) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 against the renewal of a non-derogating control order, it was not part of the court’s task to determine whether the earlier decision under section 2(1)(a) to make the original control order had been or was now flawed. [read post]
23 May 2011, 3:00 am
Avon Estates Ltd v Welsh Ministers and another [2011] EWCA Civ 55; [2011] WLR (D) 168 “Conditions attached to planning permission granted for a limited period could not be enforced against the landowner when the permissions had become spent and the planning authority had failed to enforce the removal of the building or the cessation of the permitted use so that the buildings became immune from enforcement action. [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 2:49 am
Cusack v Harrow London Borough Council: [2011] EWCA Civ 1514; [2011] WLR (D) 357 “A highway authority had power under section 66(2) of the Highways Act 1980, but not under section 80, to erect posts so as to prevent vehicular access to a frontager’s forecourt in order to safeguard users of the highway. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 2:25 am
Berry v Star Autos Ltd and others [2011] EWCA Civ 1304; [2011] WLR (D) 327 “On a claim to which there were two or more defendants the court had power to order an interim payment under CPR r 25.7(1)(e) if it were satisfied that at least one of the defendants against whom the application for interim payment was being made would be held liable and each of those defendants was insured; the fact that there might be another defendant who was not insured was immaterial.” WLR… [read post]
31 May 2011, 4:14 am
Sutton and others v England and others [2011] EWCA Civ 637; [2011] WLR (D) 182 “The partition of a trust fund did not necessarily have more than an incidental impact on, or necessarily involve a variation or rearrangement of, the beneficial interests in it. [read post]
13 Mar 2014, 1:08 pm
Apologies for the two self-promotion posts in one day, but I thought I’d mention that Cato has put together a slightly edited and improved version of my posts on Hobby Lobby v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 1:58 am
Regina (Shoesmith) v OFSTED and others [2011] EWCA Civ 642; [2011] WLR (D) 184 “The report of Ofsted into child safeguarding arrangements within a local authority, requested by the Secretary of State for Education following the death of a child while on the authority’s child protection register, was properly and fairly carried out under the statutory requirements of section 20 of the Children Act 2004. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 2:35 am
Wright v Cambridge Medical Group (a partnership) [2011] EWCA Civ 669; [2011] WLR (D) 189 “General practitioners were liable in negligence for the late referral of an infant to hospital where, if she had received effective treatment in time, she would probably have made a full recovery from an infection which in fact caused permanent damage to her hip. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 7:10 am
I thought you'd want to see the judgment itself, though. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 11:03 am
Nehls, d/b/a Nehls Home Improvement. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 7:44 pm
., Criminal Law Article 5-608(d) (i.e., the fourth time offender rule”)—illegal, as being “excessively severe? [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 3:52 am
Tunheim (D. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 9:15 am
Sentencing Due process; accurate information Michael D. [read post]
29 Nov 2015, 4:00 am
Like we saw in problem 3, since Defendant is an opposing party, the statement comes in as non-hearsay under the statutory exception of Federal Rules of Evidence § 801(d)(2). [read post]
19 Jun 2024, 8:30 pm
In Daniel FF. v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 9:07 am
HH. v. [read post]
24 Jul 2024, 1:41 pm
In Sicina v. [read post]
18 Sep 2024, 5:57 pm
Noguera v. [read post]
17 Jan 2023, 11:09 am
Part D Medication Therapy Management Program CMS proposes several changes to its medical therapy management (“MTM”) program to reduce eligibility gaps so that more Part D enrollees with complex drug regimens at increased risk of medication therapy problems would be eligible for MTM services. [read post]
