Search for: "Husband (S) v. Wife (S)"
Results 5441 - 5460
of 6,156
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Mar 2009, 7:22 pm
Supreme Court that decided between the competing entitlement claims of a widow and a deceased's former wife to payment of federal survivor benefits under the Public Service Superannuation Pension Plan.The former spouse was entitled to the husband's monthly survivor benefit pursuant to a 1971 separation agreement. [read post]
18 Mar 2009, 3:27 pm
Mary [the wife] has remarried, Alan lives with a non-marital partner with whom he recently had a child. [read post]
18 Mar 2009, 4:42 am
Plan, 129 S. [read post]
16 Mar 2009, 4:42 pm
In Rumley-Miawama v. [read post]
16 Mar 2009, 11:41 am
The trial court awarded the Wife, among other property, a portion of the Husband's military retirement pay, and the Husband appealed that specific award. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 7:30 am
Wilson upheld the commissioner's finding that "the agreement was a valid, enforceable contract," observing "no requirement that the execution of the agreement by wife be contemporaneous with that of husband. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 6:53 am
See also Smelt v. [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 1:11 pm
The husband was a broker at and he became the broker for the wife's account. [read post]
11 Mar 2009, 12:21 pm
It’s battered women week in Criminal Law.1 Today’s case2 is State v. [read post]
10 Mar 2009, 11:08 am
GASKILL V. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 8:35 am
In Hal Wagner Studios, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2009, 3:17 am
Houck v. [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 8:44 pm
He also dismissed Husband’s motion for summary judgment which was based on Wife’s failure to respond to Request for Admissions. [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 10:10 am
Bissell took over all aspects of her husband's hygienic care. [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 4:26 am
Judge Halbrooks wrote, without dissent, in Wisness v. [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 4:13 am
Early on in the marriage, husband had named his wife as the beneficiary to his employer's SIP plan. [read post]
6 Mar 2009, 11:04 pm
In Mason v. [read post]
6 Mar 2009, 8:27 am
I thought I'd pass on this gem, Marks v. [read post]
6 Mar 2009, 1:25 am
Mitchell's behalf, including his mother and wife. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 2:10 pm
Section 3 of DOMA, codified at 1 U.S.C. sec. 7, provides: "In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse' refers only to a person of the… [read post]
