Search for: "House v. Close"
Results 5901 - 5920
of 7,520
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Apr 2011, 8:00 am
On April 26, 2011, the Court of Appeals decided Licavoli v Licavoli, No 295901. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 2:13 pm
The case is Nevada Commission on Ethics v. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 4:55 am
Antonious v. [read post]
24 Apr 2011, 8:05 pm
Listen closely on the phone as you will almost be able to hear Counsel’s heart sink. [read post]
24 Apr 2011, 4:18 am
Okay, so I’m back from vacation and trying to stay abreast of what’s going on with the Kramer & Kaslow mass joinder lawsuits, which are being tried by attorney Phillip Kramer whom I interviewed in late February after I received copies of mailings from homeowners soliciting participation in a lawsuit settlement that I found deceptive or misleading. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 3:25 pm
Surdonja (1999) 31 HLR 686 and R v Hillingdon LBC ex p. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 3:25 pm
Surdonja (1999) 31 HLR 686 and R v Hillingdon LBC ex p. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 5:21 am
The recent case of Rosenhek v. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 10:25 am
My feeling is this point at least might well be appealed successfully - especially following the Advocate General's opinion in Scarlet v SABAM only a few days ago, where the reasoning is strongly against the legality of blanket filtering and monitoring to protect copyright, since invasion of personal data privacy is inevitable. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 10:16 am
The driver replied that he was waiting for his uncle, who lived in a house on Sunnyside Street. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 2:49 am
LEXIS 545 (April 14, 2011).* While the question was close, the affidavit did not show a nexus between defendant’s drug activity and his house. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 9:22 am
., v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 8:23 pm
And then that's coupled with: Tell the district judges to stick very closely to their job, allow the clear and convincing standard to apply to facts, and by that we mean brute facts, and let them decide the brute facts, but let the judge decide whether that amounts to obviousness, novelty, or any of the other prerequisites. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 5:10 pm
Central Time, the Texas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Severance v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 9:57 am
Stack House v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 9:26 am
He also strongly supported the Pullman Railroad Strike of 1894, led by Eugene V. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 6:30 am
I’m beginning to think we’re there, or, if not there, getting pretty close. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 5:31 am
But, they're close.) [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 4:13 pm
See Gill v. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 3:42 am
There follows a succinct account of Strasbourg jurisprudence on this point, from registration of a doctor Konig v Germany (No1) (1979-80) 2 EHRR 170 (civil right) to liability to tax (not a civil right) (Ferrazini v Italy (44759/98) (2001) STC 1314), via the all important decision in Pellegrin v France (2001) 31 EHRR 26 ECHR not to allow administrative servants the guarantees of Article 6 because their employment involves important state… [read post]
