Search for: "Malik v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 149
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Nov 2021, 7:55 pm
The first case, United States v. [read post]
7 Jul 2013, 12:01 pm
Malik v Fassenfelt & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 798The idea that an Englishman’s home is his castle is firmly embedded in English folklore and it finds its counterpart in the common law of the realm which provides a remedy to enable the owner of the castle to secure the eviction of trespassers from it. [read post]
3 May 2014, 4:38 pm
Our law office, Law Office of Malik W. [read post]
3 May 2014, 4:38 pm
Our law office, Law Office of Malik W. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 7:21 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 6:54 am
Ali Malik: “He just wanted to talk about [jihad] the whole time. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 8:55 am
However, affording the legal malpractice cause of action a liberal construction and according the plaintiff every favorable inference, the complaint does state a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice (see generally Hamoudeh v Mandel, 62 AD3d 948, 949; Maiolini v McAdams & Fallon, P.C., 61 AD3d 644, 645; Malik v Beal, 54 AD3d 910, 911). [read post]
22 Nov 2020, 4:20 pm
United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2010, 11:03 pm
Some States recognize "common law" marriages. [read post]
14 Jan 2009, 6:03 pm
Shezad Malik. [read post]
18 Mar 2007, 11:16 am
Pop quiz: You are a United States District Judge. [read post]
29 May 2010, 5:46 am
District Judge James V. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 3:29 pm
The Philadelphia case is Kilker v. [read post]
11 Dec 2007, 1:30 pm
" Malik v. [read post]
20 Apr 2007, 1:11 am
United States U.S. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 10:17 pm
 The authorities were reviewed and considered in Malik Estate v. [read post]
9 Apr 2010, 7:31 pm
Malik v Manchester Crown Court [2008] EWHC 1362 (Admin), Dyson LJ gave the judgment of the court (which included Pitchford and Ouseley JJ) it was held that the police were justified in demanding that freelance journalist Shiv Malik hand over source material for a book on terrorism, but the terms of the production order were too wide. [read post]
18 Oct 2009, 2:43 am
(Kilker v. [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 1:15 am
It states that “an examining officer may question a person to whom this paragraph applies for the purpose of determining whether he appears to be a person who [is or has been concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism]. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm
See paras 23 – 29 of R (English UK Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 1726 for a further explanation of the workings of PBS. [read post]
