Search for: "V D"
Results 4001 - 4020
of 76,307
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Nov 2010, 9:01 pm
CV 07-212-E-EJL-MHW (D. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 9:23 am
D., 226 Ore. [read post]
11 Jul 2024, 9:24 am
The case of Farmer-Paellmann v. [read post]
16 May 2010, 7:13 am
LEXIS 113454 (D. [read post]
21 May 2007, 10:26 am
Pollock report here (subscription req'd) on today's opinions in Bell Atlantic and Winkelman and the Court's decision to review Kentucky Department of Revenue v. [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 1:24 pm
Allen v. [read post]
24 Jun 2008, 5:07 am
Seems doubtful at this point, but in the interests of closure, it’d be nice to see how the court would decide that issue.The case cite is The Christensen Firm v. [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 2:59 am
GABRIEL D'JAMOOS, , v. [read post]
21 Jul 2021, 5:54 am
Mata- Cabello v Thula, 2021 WL 3040959 ( D. [read post]
23 Apr 2020, 9:32 am
Facilitating and inducing third-party content is their raison d’etre. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 7:44 am
In Wright v. [read post]
28 May 2010, 2:33 pm
MICHELLE MARIE EDER-McLANE, Petitioner and Appellee, v. [read post]
24 Mar 2011, 4:59 pm
In Martin v. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 11:44 am
App. 602, 608–09, aff’d, ___ N.C. ___, 891 S.E.2d 74 (2023). [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 4:00 am
The case of the day, Argentine Republic v. [read post]
13 Feb 2010, 1:32 pm
State v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 2:13 am
Regina (Cala Homes (South) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (No 2) [2011] EWCA Civ 639; [2011] WLR (D) 187 “The fact that the government was going ahead with the abolition of regional planning strategies in England was a legitimate material consideration for those determining planning applications and appeals even though the existing statutory framework required that each region should have a regional strategy. [read post]
6 Nov 2006, 6:00 am
In Graciano v. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 2:13 am
Regina (Sinclair Collis Ltd and another) v Secretary of State for Health [2011] EWCA Civ 437; [2011] WLR (D) 200 “The prohibition on the sale of tobacco from automatic vending machines was justified on the ground of the protection of public health, was proportionate and therefore did not violate EU law by its adverse effect on the business of the operators of vending machines and suppliers in other EU states. [read post]
13 May 2011, 3:21 am
Tower MCashback LLP 1 and another v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2011] UKSC 19; [2011] WLR (D) 154 “At the hearing of a taxpayer’s appeal against a closure notice determining an inquiry into a limited liability partnership’s tax return, the revenue was not confined to relying on the precise reasons for the decision given by the investigating officer in his closure notice. [read post]
