Search for: "Deal v. Deal"
Results 641 - 660
of 38,436
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Sep 2023, 10:00 pm
The article provides a primer on the Caremark standard, outlines how it was applied in the matter of Kanter v. [read post]
26 Sep 2023, 10:00 pm
The article provides a primer on the Caremark standard, outlines how it was applied in the matter of Kanter v. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 6:17 am
Hill v. [read post]
18 Mar 2013, 6:45 am
This is Howard Srebnick and Richard Strafer's case dealing with whether a defendant is entitled to a pretrial hearing to challenge forfeiture. [read post]
10 Oct 2007, 11:00 pm
The recent decision in Szarek v. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 12:43 am
Well, last night I read the report of Brisset v Brisset [2009] EWCA Civ 679, which involved parties of more modest means. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 10:12 am
It is perhaps eccentric if not downright ungrateful to promote a different business model for the music and motion picture industries having rebuilt my practice on advising and representing defendants to copyright infringement claims by trade associations in those industries but a flower is a great deal cheaper than an intellectual property lawyer and not necessarily less effective. [read post]
19 Oct 2015, 8:00 am
The post NY v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 10:50 am
United States, No. 14-378, deals with controlled substance analogues and the defendant's knowledge.Monday, April 27: Kingsley v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 2:13 am
SOCAN, SOCAN v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 2:13 am
SOCAN, SOCAN v. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 5:02 am
In a recent Michigan Court of Appeals case, Maher v Maher, Wife [“W”] claimed that a Smith Barney investment account titled to both parties was marital property. [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 7:25 pm
Bullock v. [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 9:49 am
Maryland Port Authority and Darby v. [read post]
18 May 2011, 6:07 am
GEFFNER v. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 6:56 pm
CAAF’s decision in United States v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 8:32 am
In AJ v JJ & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1448 the court was required to deal with the situation where the children wished to have their views heard in an abduction case.Lord Justice ThorpeThe Facts: As Lord Justice Thorpe said giving the leading judgment, on the face of it this was a paradigm case for a return order. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 3:41 pm
The first, Milavetz v. [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 8:21 am
It included a discussion of Robertson v. [read post]
30 Sep 2009, 6:54 am
In McDonald v. [read post]
