Search for: "High v State"
Results 641 - 660
of 35,504
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2011, 1:07 pm
" Pierce v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 6:39 am
UNITED STATES V. [read post]
8 Nov 2023, 10:27 pm
The High Court in CCIG Investments Pty Ltd v Schokman has recently overturned a decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal, shedding light on when wrongful acts occur ‘in the course or scope of an employee’s employment’.[1] Course or scope of employment? [read post]
13 Oct 2020, 12:22 pm
The Court has consolidated the cases and limited the questions to question one and two in the United States government’s memorandum of July 22 in both Smith & Nephew, Inc., et. al. v. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 4:00 am
The complaint (full text) in B.E. and S.E. v. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 4:00 am
The Washington state Supreme Court yesterday heard oral arguments (summary and video of full arguments) in Kumar v. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 2:04 pm
Take for example the recent Utah Supreme Court case of Benda v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 2:50 am
High Court (Administrative Court) Equality and Human Rights Commission v Prime Minister & Ors [2011] EWHC 2401 (Admin) (03 October 2011) AM v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 2486 (Admin) (03 October 2011) Mahajna ( Salah ) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 2481 (Admin) (30 September 2011) Cockburn, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Health [2011] EWHC 2445 (Admin)… [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 7:04 am
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Jones v Kaney [2010] EWHC 61 (QB) (21 January 2010) High Court (Administrative Court) Mhango, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 1321 (Admin) (10 June 2010) Am, R (on the application of) v The Chief Constable of West Midlands Police [2010] EWHC 1228 (Admin) (28 May 2010) The Law Society of England and Wales, R (on the application of) v The Lord… [read post]
13 Feb 2007, 2:09 am
Ron Evans got a mistrial in State v. [read post]
7 Aug 2020, 4:05 am
As previously reported, earlier this year a Vermont federal district court refused to issue a preliminary injunction to require the state to allow a student enrolled in a Catholic high school to participate in the Dual Enrollment Program that pays for high schoolers to take college courses. [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 9:36 pm
The fallacious assumptions underlying this argument are too numerous to unpack at this late hour, but at least two thoughts can start the job: first, New York v. [read post]
4 Jun 2024, 3:09 pm
On the state level, only some Medicaid programs in the U.S. cover these visits. [read post]
15 Nov 2014, 9:30 am
In State v. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 8:58 am
EPA - American Farm Bureau v. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 9:02 am
EPA - American Farm Bureau v. [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 3:31 am
High Court (Administrative Court) MK & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2012] EWHC 1896 (Admin) (10 July 2012) High Court (Chancery Division) Wood & Anor v Mistry [2012] EWHC 1899 (Ch) (10 July 2012) BXL Services, Re [2012] EWHC 1877 (Ch) (10 July 2012) JSC BTA Bank v Solodchenko & Ors [2012] EWHC 1891 (Ch) (10 July 2012) Stevens v Hamed [2012] EWHC 1871 (Ch) (6 July 2012)… [read post]
24 Mar 2009, 5:07 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) MH (Syria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ 226 (24 March 2009) High Court (Administrative Court) BM, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs [2009] EWHC 571 (Admin) (23 March 2009) Harrison, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for [...] [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 2:55 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Murrell & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 1367 (03 December 2010) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) XJA v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2010] EWHC 3174 (QB) (03 December 2010) High Court (Chancery Division) Monte Developments Ltd v Court Management Consultants Ltd & Ors [2010] EWHC 3071 (Ch) (29 November 2010) High Court… [read post]
10 Mar 2012, 6:09 pm
The recent decision in Tamiz v Google (High Court, Eady J) comes at a very important time for the debate on the liability of Internet intermediaries. [read post]
