Search for: "PAGE v. ATKINS" Results 21 - 40 of 92
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Nov 2018, 4:21 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
A slight exaggeration, but in 195 Hawthorne Partners, LLC. v Thompson  2018 NY Slip Op 32804(U)  October 30, 2018  Supreme Court, Kings County  Docket Number: 506136/18 Judge: Leon Ruchelsman there are pages and pages of discussion of a back-and-forth transfer, deeds, mortgages, foreclosures of what must be a valuable property. [read post]
22 Mar 2017, 4:45 am by SHG
David Meyer-Lindenberg and I crossed Kathryn Kase, past-Executive Director of Texas Defender Services, now back to the trenches fighting Texas’ love of execution. [read post]
27 Sep 2016, 6:45 am by Ron Coleman
All this is by way of linking to Michael Atkins’s recent post on the latest statement on the topic of that elusive “exceptional case,” this one on the other side of the continent, in a Ninth Circuit case called Haas Automation, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Aug 2016, 4:10 am by SHG
There is still the hole they left when they decided Atkins, and again when they decided Hall v. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 7:08 am by Roy Black
No Island of Sanity: Paula Jones v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 11:49 pm by Jeff Gamso
 And they're up to 4 law clerks/staff attorneys each.From the oral argument before the court Monday morning in Brumfield v. [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 5:09 pm by INFORRM
On 6 March 2015, Sir David Eady gave judgment in the case of The Bussey Law Firm PC v Page [2015] EWHC 563 (QB). [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 4:52 pm by INFORRM
It is also worth recalling the words of Lord Atkin in Ley v Hamilton (1935) 153 LT 384 at 386: It is precisely because the real damage cannot be ascertained and established that the damages are at large. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 7:57 am by John Elwood
Justice Goodwin Liu filed a twenty-one-page dissent from the eighty-three-page majority opinion. [read post]
29 May 2014, 4:24 am by SHG
  The case involved Florida’s rule establishing an absolute cutoff for execution under Atkins v. [read post]