Search for: "In re Estate of Harris v. Harris" Results 21 - 40 of 160
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Feb 2019, 5:42 am by Eugene Volokh
Keefe, 402 U.S. 415, 91 S.Ct. 1575, 29 L.Ed.2d 1 (1971), activists who disapproved of a real estate agent's (apparently lawful) behavior repeatedly leafleted near where he lived and went to church, demanding that he change his practices. [read post]
30 Dec 2018, 3:03 am by Ben
Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit in Folkens v Wyland. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 12:00 am by Carlos Kelly
Take-Away If you’re developing property, hire an attorney competent in land use and Bert Harris Act claims in case local government tries to change relevant local laws, rules, regulations, or ordinances. [read post]
24 Apr 2018, 2:19 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
If you’re told to return and recut the video and find the source material, that takes time and money and eats into subsistence return. [read post]
22 Mar 2018, 4:44 am by Ben
Second, even had the Gayes preserved their challenge, neither Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) nor our decisions in Westinghouse and El-Hakem v. [read post]
5 Sep 2017, 5:41 pm by Patricia Salkin
(SGV) was a real estate development company which bought approximately 140 acres of land in the City of Alabaster for $1.65 million. [read post]
5 Aug 2017, 11:50 am by Wolfgang Demino
See image of Trustee's Deed recorded in the Harris County Clerk's Office below: FIRST THE DUNNING, THEN THE DEED Section 1692e(5) prohibits threatening to take any action that cannot legally be taken, while  Section 1692e(2) prohibits falsely representing . . . the character, amount, or legal status of any debt. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 11:33 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
 at 9.In mid-2014, Guerrero contacted BANA to resolve his delinquent loan and to re-apply for another loan modification. [read post]
19 Dec 2016, 3:21 am by Peter Mahler
The Re/Max Case The dispute in Re/Max of New York, Inc. v Weber, Short Form Order, Index No. 600848/16 [Sup Ct Nassau County Nov. 29, 2016], centered on two, diametrically opposed narratives surrounding a 1998 transaction in which a stockholder with 15 shares representing a 4% equity stake sold his interest to the defendant, Weber, who served as president and director of the company in the business of franchising real estate brokers. [read post]