Search for: "House v. Close"
Results 4541 - 4560
of 7,547
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Jan 2014, 3:00 pm
I’m afraid that comments are closed on this post. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 4:24 pm
It's a close case. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 2:46 pm
Macklin v. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 8:38 am
The House passed a patent reform bill, and it’s likely some version will pass the Senate as well. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 7:15 am
In Flora Dolnikov v. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 4:27 am
In Buckley v. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 2:07 pm
There have been many discussions over the years of how to give visual representation of massive human rights violations, whether they are war crimes on the battlefield or abuses inside a regime’s closed cells, and how to represent that for which there is no available visual documentation. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 4:02 am
But, despite the risk that the applicant's business would close if the termination went ahead, an injunction to prevent the termination of the licensing agreement (applied for under the Arbitration Act 1996 s.44) was refused by Mr Justice Stuart-Smith. [read post]
12 Jan 2014, 1:26 pm
v. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 9:03 pm
In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 1:04 pm
This very paradigm rendered a non-compete unenforceable in Dawson v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 4:12 am
Or is this just one of those very close cases that could have gone either way where reasonable minds differ? [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 10:00 pm
The Gattiscourt relied on Mid Valley Real Estate Solutions V, LLC v. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 6:15 am
Hence, housing bubbles float ever upward until they don’t. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 12:46 am
Obrey v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 1584 concerns an appeal against an Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) decision which set aside the findings of the First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support) that Reg. 7(17), Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, breached Art. 14 ECHR (although not expressly set out in the Judgment, presumably in conjunction with A1P1). [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 12:46 am
Obrey v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 1584 concerns an appeal against an Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) decision which set aside the findings of the First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support) that Reg. 7(17), Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, breached Art. 14 ECHR (although not expressly set out in the Judgment, presumably in conjunction with A1P1). [read post]
4 Jan 2014, 7:00 am
A Less Bleak House? [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 4:42 pm
District Judge Alfred V. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 5:53 pm
Among those programs covered by the House bill is the SLS. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 12:33 pm
This is why they pay close attention to prisoner civil rights claims in assuring they do not clog up the federal courts.The case is Faulk v. [read post]
