Search for: "Grant v. Superior Court"
Results 5761 - 5780
of 6,584
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Nov 2009, 10:00 pm
In Palisades Collection, L.L.C. v. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 1:20 pm
The Superior Court granted the writs and ordered their release, and the Sheriff’s Office appealed. [read post]
21 Jan 2024, 12:30 pm
You also have to pick your venue, which is between Superior Court and Land Court. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 5:26 pm
On November 17, 2008, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the case of Borough v. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 4:15 am
, Isaacs v. [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 2:58 am
For example, in South African Post Office Ltd v CCMA and others (2012) 33 ILJ 2970 (LC) the court noted that while there have been cases which held that an acting allowance does not constitute a “benefit”. [read post]
2 May 2012, 7:49 am
United States and Hill v. [read post]
12 May 2010, 4:16 am
Trojan, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Mar 2018, 11:48 am
Here in Florida, the concept of vicarious liability has been well-established since the 1920 Florida Supreme Court case of Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 1:32 am
Judgment was entered in default and the damages were then assessed by the court and a permanent injunction granted. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 10:33 am
From my LexisNexis Alerts on "Graves Amendment" court decisions come these, mostly recent New York cases: AUTO – GRAVES AMENDMENT – LEASED VEHICLE – NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY Brown v. [read post]
11 Apr 2010, 7:48 pm
Superior Court, 2010 Cal. [read post]
24 Jul 2020, 3:00 am
(G052735; 20 Cal.App.5th 1156; Orange County Superior Court; 30-2012-00605637.) [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 2:36 pm
While the CAT did not consider itself bound by the Superior Court “vexatious litigant” order, it summarily dismissed the application without a hearing because it raised the same issues decided in the court cases and was therefore vexatious. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 2:36 pm
While the CAT did not consider itself bound by the Superior Court “vexatious litigant” order, it summarily dismissed the application without a hearing because it raised the same issues decided in the court cases and was therefore vexatious. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 12:47 am
Supreme Court's 2006 eBay v. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 9:24 am
The California Supreme Court ruled in the 2008 case of Ross v. [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 12:10 pm
With respect to one of the carriers, however, the Court granted the motion to dismiss, based upon a specific biological substance exclusion. [read post]
3 Mar 2017, 8:54 am
The employee then sued for age discrimination in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act and the district court granted summary judgment to Optomec. [read post]
6 Jan 2022, 9:56 am
After extensive briefing and an in-person hearing, the Court granted AMBA a landslide victory. [read post]
