Search for: "State v Cooper" Results 4121 - 4140 of 8,565
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 May 2015, 10:00 pm by Eduardo Ustaran
It’s been said before but the CJEU’s decision on the Google Spain v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 12:29 pm
” This clear-and-convincing-evidence standard, the court held in today’s Davis v. [read post]
28 May 2015, 8:12 am
In addition, recipients of bribes and inducements would no longer have to go around in an embarrassing state of denial, and everyone -- including FIFA Presidents -- would be taken, by virtue of the fact of registration, to have constructive notice of all amounts declared and the purposes for which they were given and received.Further reading:"The FIFA corporate sponsor corruption dashboard" on Quartz, here "Visa, Nike involved in FIFA corruption scandal 'brand… [read post]
28 May 2015, 12:00 am by Pietro Franzina
As for the foreign creditors – i.e. those having their habitual residence, domicile or registered office in a Member State other than the State of the proceedings, including the tax authorities and social security authorities of Member States: Arti [read post]
20 May 2015, 7:17 am by Joy Waltemath
Accordingly, the appeals court judgement was reversed and the trial court’s grant of summary judgment against the employee was reinstated (Shell Oil Co. v. [read post]
19 May 2015, 5:12 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Respondent testified that she will cooperate with Petitioner and comply with all services recommended in the proposed dispositional plan. [read post]
18 May 2015, 7:45 am by Jason Rantanen
Cooper Indus., Inc., 199 F.3d 1009, 1011-12 (9th Cir. 1999). [read post]
16 May 2015, 4:44 pm by The Book Review Editor
Moreover, he adds, they do not grant states an “assured capability for unacceptable damage. [read post]
16 May 2015, 2:44 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
   CASE STYLE: State of Texas v Samara Portfolio Management, LLC et al; Cause No. 2013-35721 in the 80th Judicial District Court of Texas (Harris County)    [read post]
14 May 2015, 5:46 pm by Jim Gerl
  The court stated that an IEP is a snapshot not a retrospective. [read post]
14 May 2015, 12:57 am by INFORRM
  For example, in Quinton v Peirce & Cooper ([2009] EWHC 912 (QB)), where a DPA claim was added to libel and malicious falsehood claims, Eady J said: “I must now turn to the Data Protection Act. [read post]
13 May 2015, 4:30 am
  The case is called Williams v. [read post]