Search for: "State v. Hodge" Results 541 - 560 of 1,339
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jan 2015, 5:01 am by Lauren Wood, Olswang LLP
      [1] Arnold v Britton & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 902 (22 July 2013), para 45 [2] Ibid, para 50 [3] Ibid, para 57 [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 15-16 February 2017. [read post]
4 May 2015, 4:29 am by Amy Howe
Briefly: At ACSblog, Ann Hodges discusses Friedrichs v. [read post]
8 Jun 2018, 3:30 am by Paula Monopoli
Hodges, the United States Supreme Court held that states must allow same-sex couples to marry.1 But that decision didn’t address the myriad corollary questions that arose from marriage equality. [read post]
8 Jun 2018, 3:30 am by Paula Monopoli
Hodges, the United States Supreme Court held that states must allow same-sex couples to marry.1 But that decision didn’t address the myriad corollary questions that arose from marriage equality. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 5:14 am by Russ Bensing
Ice had implicitly overruled State v. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 2:30 am by Ryan Dolby-Stevens, Olswang LLP
  The lead judgment was given by Lady Hale (with whom Lord Hodge and Lord Kerr agreed). [read post]
4 Apr 2016, 4:00 am by Antonia Gold, Olswang LLP
Supreme Court decision Lord Hodge, with whom Lord Neuberger, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath and Lord Hughes agreed, gave the judgment of the court. [read post]
27 Feb 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 15-16 February 2017. [read post]
7 Nov 2017, 3:45 am
Hodge recognized for the first time same-sex marriage at the state and federal level. [read post]
4 Sep 2015, 4:54 am by Timothy P. Flynn
And now, perhaps by the Chancellor's design, here comes his 15-minutes of ill-conceived fame.In denying the requested relief upon completion of the proofs, the Chancellor stated that because of the SCOTUS decision in Obergefell v Hodges, the Supreme Court now needed to clarify, "when a marriage is no longer a marriage. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 1:00 am by Ryan Dolby-Stevens, Olswang LLP
In the Court of Appeal, the court considered the development of the case law, especially the recent cases of Murray v Leisureplay Plc [2005] EWCA Civ 963 and El Makdessi v Cavendish Square Holdings BV [2013] EWCA Civ 1539, stating (per Lord Justice Moore-Bick at paragraph 21): “[T]he modern cases thus appear to accept that a clause providing for payment on a breach of a sum of money that exceeds the amount that a court would award as compensation…may not be… [read post]