Search for: "E.G. v. State (In re E.G.)" Results 41 - 60 of 5,003
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Nov 2019, 11:28 am
  Yes, we're a bit nit-picky when the United States is concerned, and, yes, the United States has promulgated rules that are very much in favor of . . . surprise, surprise . . . the United States. [read post]
21 May 2014, 6:15 am by Kate Fort
See, e.g., In re Interest of Louis S. et al., supra (where further rehabilitative efforts would be futile, requirement of active efforts is satisfied); T.F. v. [read post]
1 Jan 2021, 8:22 am by Joel R. Brandes
See e.g., In re One Infant Child, No. 12-CV-7797, 2014 WL 704037, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 1:20 pm
  And, in any event -- and this is her central point -- we don't want the federal 30-day rule to vary in application depending on the vagaries of particular state rules about service of process; e.g., who "counts" as the agent for the company.So we're going to have a simple rule. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 10:24 am by Don Cruse
Notice by Publication: Maybe not the best idea in parental-termination cases In re E.R., J.B., E.G., and C.L., children, No. 11-0282 (DB) (Jefferson, C.J.) [read post]