Search for: "Jones v. United States Court of Appeals et al" Results 41 - 60 of 162
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jul 2016, 12:26 pm by Native American Rights Fund
Federal Trial Courts Bulletin http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/dct/2016dct.htmlWyoming, et al v. [read post]
3 Jun 2016, 6:40 am by Dennis Crouch
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, et al., No. 15-1314 4. [read post]
22 May 2016, 6:06 pm by Justin A
Richard Aaron et al.), but the only U.S. [read post]
14 Apr 2016, 1:00 pm by Steven Cohen
ESS Support Services Worldwide et alUnited States District Court – Eastern District of Louisiana – April 11th, 2016 – This is a negligence case in which the plaintiff (Dennis) was allegedly injured after he fell off a top bunk while on board the SEVAN LOUISIANA. [read post]
3 Oct 2015, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
” The Court then went on to consider an alternative basis for striking out, namely abuse of the process of the Court The Jameel principle (deriving from Dow Jones & Co Inc v Jameel [2005] EWCA Civ 75) is used frequently in the United Kingdom  to strike out libel actions as an abuse of process and has been raised in one reported Ontario case (Goldhar v Haaretz.com et al., 2015 ONSC 1128) without success However… [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 5:38 pm by Law Lady
Harris Private Property Rights Protection Act -- Trial court erred by denying award of costs to prevailing city in inverse condemnation action in which court found that no taking had occurred -- A prevailing governmental entity in an inverse condemnation action is entitled to recover costsCARIBBEAN CONDOMINIUM, ETC., ET AL., Appellants/Cross-Appellees, v. [read post]
Court of Appeal Before Jackson, Lloyd Jones and Floyd LJJ, [2013] EWCA Civ 616 (see here), the Home Secretary argued that the decision made Pham de facto stateless (with nationality but denied the protection which should go with it), but not de jure stateless (without nationality under the laws of any state) and therefore it did not make him stateless within the meaning of section 40(4) of the 1981 Act. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 6:28 pm by Kevin LaCroix
”[8] Only after the Commission’s final order becomes effective, may the order be appealed to a United States Court of Appeals, and then respondents must overcome the standard of appellate review that generally defers to the expertise of administrative agenies when the Court of Appeals reviews SEC orders. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am by Schachtman
See also Manual at 614 n. 198., citing Ofer Shpilberg, et al., The Next Stage: Molecular Epidemiology, 50 J. [read post]
18 Apr 2015, 3:44 pm by Stephen Bilkis
The above case law has limited the scope of relief to a credit against arrears (Fitzgerald et al, supra), or a determination by the Family Court of the amount of a credit for overpayments made directly to the custodial parent and also collected simultaneously by the Support collections Unit (Taddonio et al, supra at 936). [read post]
12 Apr 2015, 11:23 am by Stephen Bilkis
The above case law has limited the scope of relief to a credit against arrears (Fitzgerald et al, supra), or a determination by the Family Court of the amount of a credit for overpayments made directly to the custodial parent and also collected simultaneously by the Support collections Unit (Taddonio et al, supra at 936). [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 9:56 pm
See Brief for Petitioners 27, Reply Brief 16; Brief for Respondents 43; see also Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 12–13.Teva Pharma. [read post]