Search for: "Doe v. Doe"
Results 5281 - 5300
of 152,604
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2024, 12:00 am
On June 14, 2024, the Texas Supreme Court declined to consider the case of Antoun v. [read post]
24 Feb 2016, 9:28 am
The New York Times' Adam Liptak surveys the uses of Bob Dylan lyrics in judicial opinions here, and lists some here.Below, a short bibliography of secondary sources on Bob Dylan and the Law:Bob Dylan and the Law: An Inspriation for Personal Injury AttorneysDon't Put a Price on My Soul: Bob Dylan, Justice, and the LawThe Jurisprudence of Bob Dylan Knake, Renee Newman, Why the Law Needs Music: Revisiting NAACP v. [read post]
9 Aug 2024, 12:00 am
" It is worth noting that despite the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
1 Nov 2012, 10:32 am
The case is State v. [read post]
15 May 2007, 3:00 pm
Interested Persons, Following is my formal statement on behalf of John Doe, the plaintiff/petitioner in Doe v. [read post]
14 Mar 2007, 12:15 pm
Ninth Circuit decides Raich v. [read post]
11 Oct 2021, 11:06 am
[The unusually named case is Doe v. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 1:36 pm
Pa 2: The Judiciary’s response to this Ministry of Justice (MoJ) Consultation is predicated on the fact the Government does not accept this position and intends to ask Parliament to render the justice system self-financing. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 12:15 pm
Matter of Stray from the Heart, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2013, 4:36 am
Civil Service Law §106 does not authorize an individual to maintain a private cause of action based on alleged violation of the statute Goddard v Martino, 2013 NY Slip Op 23240, Supreme Court, Dutchess County, Justice Peter M. [read post]
26 Sep 2012, 4:57 am
While the Court does not assume that Plaintiff or its counsel have engaged in any improper conduct, the Court will impose the following procedures in this matter to ensure the prompt identification and service of the putative Defendants in this matter (see Order) c/m. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 1:27 pm
” What does it mean? [read post]
28 Feb 2010, 6:28 am
The leading authority on this, Maaouia v France (39652/98) (2001) 33 EHRR 42 ECHR establishes this beyond doubt and it is reflected in domestic law by cases like MNM v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2000) INLR 576 IAT. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 10:10 pm
HTC v. [read post]
17 Oct 2021, 3:12 pm
People v. [read post]
19 May 2012, 11:32 am
Just because a transaction does not fit within the list above does not mean that the note is a security. [read post]
30 Nov 2020, 4:53 am
On November 19, 2020, the Court reversed Judge Highberger’s decision and held that the FAAAA does not preempt application of the “ABC” test in the trucking industry. [read post]
16 Apr 2020, 6:10 am
The Supreme Court, in Karagozian v. [read post]
13 Nov 2017, 9:22 am
United States and Debs v. [read post]
9 Feb 2022, 4:58 am
Peter Sgromo v. [read post]
