Search for: "State v. Childs"
Results 4701 - 4720
of 18,882
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2015, 5:37 am
") AC35836 - State v. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 5:56 pm
The Supreme Court has consistently stated that based upon the privacy provision of the Florida Constitution, the state may not intrude upon the parents' fundamental right to raise their children except in cases where the child is threatened with harm. [read post]
6 Jan 2009, 5:30 am
While state courts in matrimonial actions are often asked by an ex-spouse to modify an existing child support obligation under Lepis v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 12:38 pm
On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in Obergefell v. [read post]
26 Jun 2008, 8:14 pm
The case, Williams v. [read post]
26 Jun 2008, 8:14 pm
The case, Williams v. [read post]
10 Mar 2014, 8:25 pm
Judge Mark Bennett entered a consent decree on February, 28, 2014, resolving the brought by the EEOC in EEOC v. [read post]
6 Oct 2013, 11:03 am
In Matter of Dunn, Lake v M.P.C. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 11:35 am
United States (health care services, federal breach of contract)* State Courts Bulletin http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/currentstate.htmCases featured:Stephens v. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 7:07 am
Yet, a few years ago, the Supreme Court said in United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 2:25 pm
Dept. of Interior (Personal Injury; Law Enforcement Agreement)* State Courts Bulletinhttp://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/state/2015state.htmlIn re Doe (Indian Child Welfare Act; Active Efforts; Termination of Parental Rights)* United States Federal Trial Courts Bulletin http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/dct/2015dct.htmlHayes v. [read post]
27 Oct 2022, 5:00 am
By Donna Gitter In 2021, the Supreme Court articulated in Tandon v. [read post]
25 Jul 2013, 10:29 am
It provides that, except in emergency situations, a court of this state may not modify a child custody determination made by a court of another state unless a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under paragraph (a) or (b) of subdivision one of section seventy-six of this title and a court of this state or a court of the other state determines that the child, the child's parents, and any person… [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 6:10 am
Someone raised a First Amendment objection to the morphing prohibition, but the Second Circuit will have none of this.The case is United States v. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 12:43 pm
“I do think it’s an important decision because it talks about those statutory factors [in child certifications], and it says the state actually has to prove those things,” Carnegie said. [read post]
6 May 2015, 8:48 am
In United States v. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 6:20 am
Capogrosso v. [read post]
1 May 2009, 6:43 am
United States v. [read post]
24 Jan 2006, 2:38 am
The High Court in England seems to have made it far easier for a child-abducting parent to prove the defenses of consent and acquiescence in a Hague Convention child abduction case than has previously been the case.In CJ v KJ [2005] EWHC 2998 (Fam), Mr. [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 4:09 pm
For example, in United States v. [read post]
