Search for: "In Interest of CT"
Results 581 - 600
of 9,057
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Mar 2023, 7:51 am
No Private Benefit Provision of 501(c)(3) Museums While § 501(c)(3) does not specifically mention private benefits restrictions,[16] it is found in the Treasury Regulation § 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(1)(ii), which prohibits an organization from operating “for the benefit of private interests such as designated individuals, the creator or his family, shareholders of the organization, or persons controlled, directly or indirectly, by such private interests. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 3:02 pm
We need not decide this question, however, because Lisa did not withhold her consent to the court’s jurisdiction over her military pension when she filed her dissolution petition and specifically requested judicial confirmation of her separate property and her interest in any community property. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 5:01 am
Ct. 2239 (2021) (per curiam), Sause v. [read post]
18 Mar 2023, 11:39 am
Ct. [read post]
15 Mar 2023, 6:13 am
Ct. [read post]
15 Mar 2023, 5:15 am
Ct. 1970, 1977 (2021). [read post]
14 Mar 2023, 11:48 pm
Ct. 855 (2011); Golden Gate Pharmacy Servs., Inc. v. [read post]
14 Mar 2023, 12:16 pm
Ct. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 9:08 am
Ct. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 4:05 am
City of New Haven, (D CT, March 10, 2023), a Rastafarian police officer sued claiming religious and disability discrimination after being denied an exemption from the police department's grooming policy. [read post]
12 Mar 2023, 8:58 am
Supreme Ct. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 11:48 pm
The test–the first commercial laboratory blood test for concussions–would eliminate the need for CT scans in some cases. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 1:44 pm
Ct. 1178, 1187, 87 L. [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 3:53 pm
I was keenly interested in reading this opinion at the outset because it involves a lawsuit against In-N-Out Burgers, which has a fair amount of cachet in the youthful fast food world. [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 4:00 am
Miglin sought spousal support along with a restraining order (LSM v EJM, [1999] 3 RFL (5th) 106 (ON Sup Ct J) at para 1). [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 9:21 am
The interesting thing about the age numbers is that at some point you see they turn again as juries increasingly blame age for the injuries. [read post]
3 Mar 2023, 11:47 am
Not because the Court of Appeal necessarily decides the case the wrong way, but rather because it's a fight between two nonprofit organizations that do public interest work (Breathe Southern California, on the one hand, and the American Lung Association on the other) as to which entity is entitled to various bequests made -- but not yet funded -- during the period in which these two nonprofits were affiliated.You just gotta feel bad that instead of working the dispute out informally,… [read post]
3 Mar 2023, 10:59 am
Ct. at 2614. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 2:46 pm
Superior Ct. for Norfolk Cnty., 457 U.S. 596, 603 (1982). [read post]
