Search for: "STATE v B J J J"
Results 621 - 640
of 6,787
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Dec 2022, 5:16 am
” In arguing that venue may not lie in D.C., Van Grack and Chervak rely on United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 12:58 pm
Two years ago, in United States v. [read post]
6 Dec 2022, 9:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
5 Dec 2022, 1:47 am
The Commercial Court (Knowles J) determined both issues in favour of Reignwood. [read post]
4 Dec 2022, 5:20 am
NARA v. [read post]
3 Dec 2022, 7:08 am
Pix Credit hereWhile interest in this case, HKSAR v Lai Man Ling [2022] 4 HKC 410, [2022] HKDC 355, reported in September 2022, may be diminishing, its relevance requires sustained examination. [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 1:00 am
High Court’s decision In the High Court, Kelyn Bacon KC (now Bacon J) was persuaded by B’s counsel. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 5:00 am
§8522(b). [read post]
30 Nov 2022, 1:25 pm
Sterling, Amy Pharr Hefley, Anthony J. [read post]
30 Nov 2022, 4:00 am
Reznitskiy v. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 2:52 pm
The federal government uses its contracting dollars not only to purchase the supplies and services it needs, but also to support broader policy goals. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 4:13 am
P. 26(b)(3)(A); Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1970 Amendment; 8 FED. [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 6:27 pm
In United States v. [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 4:45 pm
Professor Harrison's work was recently highlighted by Professor Amanda Frost at SCOTUSBlog as one side of a debate critical to United States v. [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 11:48 am
My writings about the third of the above themes did not take form until ‘Organized Labor, the Supreme Court, and Harris v Quinn: Déjà Vu All Over Again? [read post]
27 Nov 2022, 4:38 pm
Allen on the HHS News & Views Facebook group webpage between March 2018–December 2019; b) A letter written by Mr. [read post]
27 Nov 2022, 3:06 pm
§ 289(a)(3)(B). [read post]
26 Nov 2022, 6:52 am
” Light v. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 2:12 pm
Policy, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 2:50 am
As a reminder… ‘Obvious & gross’ In the case of Wachtel v Wachtel [1973], the issue of conduct was considered by the family court and further summarised by Lady Hale in Miller [2006] as follows:“[…] once the assets are seen as a pool, and the couple as equal partners, then it is only equitable to take their conduct into account if one has been very much more to blame than the other: in the famous words of Ormrod J in Wachtel v Wachtel… [read post]
