Search for: "Howells v. Howells" Results 541 - 560 of 878
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jun 2011, 1:23 pm by Dave
  Rules create the so-called “bright lines” between entitlement and disentitlement; rules are also, by their nature,  insensitive to particular household circumstances.In two recent decisions of the the Upper Tribunal, Administrative Appeal Chamber, the rules have been challenged as being insufficiently sensitive to individual household needs: RG v SSWP and North Wiltshire DC (HB) [2011] UKUT 198 (AAC) and IB v Birmingham CC [2011] UKUT 23 (AAC). [read post]
2 Dec 2016, 8:19 am by John Elwood
Merrill, 15-1139, and Howell v. [read post]
19 Nov 2018, 8:03 am by Amy Howe
And that omission, Stuart contended, was inconsistent with Bullcoming v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 6:19 am by David Oscar Markus
.; Long, J Craig; Howell, Chanley T.; Harper, C. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 6:55 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
(citing Mitchell, 246 S.W.2d at 168, and Howell v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 6:00 am by Andre Mouledoux
  We agree with the Fourth Circuit’s thorough analysis of this issue in Howell v. [read post]
15 Sep 2020, 11:59 am by Anna Salvatore
  Jen Patja Howell shared an episode of The Lawfare Podcast featuring a conversation between Benjamin Wittes and Mike Schmidt about Schmidt’s new book, “Donald Trump v. [read post]
6 Oct 2018, 5:11 am by Anushka Limaye
Matthew Kahn posted the Oct. 1 joint unclassified filings in the Qassim v. [read post]
11 Jun 2021, 10:06 am by Ajay Sarma, Christiana Wayne
Rohini Kurup discussed the Supreme Court’s decision to hear United States v. [read post]
3 May 2022, 1:04 pm by Katherine Pompilio
The Supreme Court has voted to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. [read post]
11 Jul 2019, 11:01 am by Vishnu Kannan
District Court for the District of Columbia’s ruling in United States of America v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 3:21 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The requirements are "rigorous, and difficult to satisfy" (Howell New York Post Co. 81 NY2d 115, 122 (1993)), as even conduct which may be characterized as "unacceptable and socially repugnant" does not "rise to the level of atrocity" (Shea v. [read post]