Search for: "People v J." Results 4401 - 4420 of 7,244
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Apr 2013, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
Until 2004, no state permitted people of the same sex to marry, and thus a marriage between two people of the same sex would be void—as if it never happened. [read post]
28 Apr 2013, 7:04 am by INFORRM
  However he recognised that the issue has a transnational dimension and has important implications for many millions of people across the EU making use of the internet. [read post]
27 Apr 2013, 3:37 pm
So if you don't like the direction this post has taken, call it drool, slobber, slaver, drivel. 1852   J. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 5:14 pm by INFORRM
The permanent damage that internet publications can inflict is very much the focus of Tugendhat J’s assessment of damages in the case of ZAM v CFW & Anor [2013] EWHC 662 (QB), encapsulated in the memorable description he quoted in an earlier judgment: “what is to be found on the internet may become like a tattoo“. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 6:53 am by Graham Smith
  However he recognised that the issue has a transnational dimension and has important implications for many millions of people across the EU making use of the internet. [read post]
13 Apr 2013, 10:00 am by Benjamin Wittes
Ct. 945, 963 (2012) (Alito, J., concurring in the judgment) [read post]
12 Apr 2013, 2:28 am by Susan Brenner
M.V. sent his mother a text message, stating [Hinojosa] `stabbed J[.A]. [read post]