Search for: "Minus v. State"
Results 441 - 460
of 871
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 May 2015, 9:01 pm
In its April 29, 2015 decision in Dickson v. [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 1:00 pm
See Caplinger v. [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 6:51 am
The courts ultimately said “no,” see Abigail Alliance v. von Eschenbach, 495 F.3d 695 (D.C. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 6:55 am
HAVENNER, Appellant, v. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 6:01 am
Courts and regulators provided some clarification (in Microsoft v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 2:31 pm
It has been consistently recognized by the courts of this State that there is an overriding need of a custodial parent and children to occupy and remain in the marital residence, which needs outweighs the non-custodial Page 26 parent's desire to receive any immediate proceeds from its sale (see Nissen v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 5:26 am
Thus, choice of law created an insurmountable predominance/manageability problem based on the neet to apply the laws of many disparate jurisdictions.Faced with this problems, plaintiffs did what plaintiffs do, they argued that the (single) law of the defendant’s home state should apply, rather than the law of the class members’ domiciles − or worse, the laws of the persons who actually took (and were helped by) the drug. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 5:00 am
” State v. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 5:00 am
And that is a ground not for removal but for asking the court in which the suit was filed − the state court − to dismiss the suit.Walton, 643 F.3d at 1001 (citing cases from Third, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits) (emphasis added).Not in the Fourth Circuit. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 11:13 am
Both the Oregon Court of Appeals and the Oregon Supreme Court so ruled in State v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 12:16 pm
In a recent case, Lanois v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 11:45 am
See Armstrong v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 3:59 pm
Hardy, R (on the application of) v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [2015] EWHC 890 Oh, we have been waiting for this one. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 3:10 pm
Michigan State won the game 76-70. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 12:44 pm
Townsend v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 9:21 am
Below, I have summarized Barajas v. [read post]
19 Mar 2015, 5:00 am
Garcia v. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 5:33 am
In Perez v. [read post]
10 Mar 2015, 4:28 am
[v] Responsiveness: Building relationships with forensic investigators before a cyber-attack occurs will help achieve two main goals. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 5:52 am
’”In light of the holding in [Bauman], the court finds that [defendant’s] compliance with Delaware’s registration statutes − mandatory for doing business within the state − cannot constitute consent to jurisdiction, and the Delaware Supreme Court’s [prior] decision . [read post]
