Search for: "Parks v. Parks"
Results 521 - 540
of 15,909
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Sep 2011, 3:15 am
A report from Denver about the conflict between parking requirements (mandated by the local zoning code) and new walkable development projects. [read post]
22 Dec 2021, 6:21 am
The post DENNIS EDMONDS v. [read post]
6 Jun 2008, 11:00 am
The National Consumers League will hold the Muller v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 2:32 pm
Count V: Failure to Make Repairs. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 5:15 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 3:00 am
In Javinsky-Wenzesk v. [read post]
23 Apr 2009, 8:50 am
In Meadow v NYC Dept. of Fin., Motor Vehicles, 2009 NY Slip Op 03048 (App. [read post]
9 Aug 2009, 8:33 pm
In reasons for judgement released this week by the BC Court of Appeal in the UBC Parking Fines Class Action (Barbour v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 2:31 am
CARLA BURDETTE v. [read post]
4 Nov 2022, 5:33 am
Co. v. [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 4:45 pm
Here is the abstract: Conditions will be harsher now for women than before Roe v. [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 4:19 am
In United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:59 am
Parks. [read post]
20 Mar 2017, 8:32 pm
Park; and (2) whether Park and its precursor, United States v. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 12:44 pm
The case, Hagar v. [read post]
24 Apr 2013, 3:18 pm
In Golden Gate Land Holdings LLC v. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 12:26 pm
Alden-Park Strathmoor, Inc., No. 110406. [read post]
16 Mar 2009, 2:25 am
Approaching a parked car to talk to the driver is not a seizure. [read post]
3 Dec 2012, 3:21 am
Econord SpA v Comune di Cagno and others (Joined Cases C-182/11 and C-183/11); [2012] WLR (D) 356 “The condition established by the case law of the Court of Justice European Union (Teckal Srl v Comune di Viano (Case C-107/98) [1999] ECR I-8121 and Parking Brixen GmbH v Gemeinde Brixen (Case C-485/03) [2005] ECR I-8585) to the effect that, in order to be exempted from their obligation to initiate a public tendering procedure and instead to make an in-house… [read post]
14 May 2012, 7:17 am
As the name suggests, this award acquires its name from the well-known decision of Brightman J. in Wrotham Park Estate Co Ltd v Parkside Homes Ltd [1974] 1 WLR 798. [read post]
