Search for: "P. v. House" Results 681 - 700 of 3,792
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2020, 12:07 pm by Howard Friedman
Barclay, An Economic Approach to Religious Exemptions, (Florida Law Review, Forthcoming).Haider Ala Hamoudi, Engagements and Entanglements: The Contemporary Waqf and the Fragility of Shi'i Quietism, (Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 35, p. 2115, 2020).Hershey H. [read post]
18 Nov 2013, 6:30 am by Dan Ernst
  Harold Koh, recently returned to academia from his tenure as the Legal Advisor to the Secretary of State in the Obama administration, will chair and moderate.Moderator: Harold Hongju Koh, Yale Law SchoolSpeaker: Professor Pär Kristoffer Cassel, University of Michigan Department of HistorySpeaker: Tahirih V. [read post]
15 Sep 2023, 4:00 am by Deanne Sowter
Survivors often suffer long term economic consequences, including poor credit, housing issues, and few to no assets. [read post]
24 May 2012, 8:21 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
P. 11) General Metal Fabricating Corporation v Stergiou (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] [read post]
22 Oct 2008, 10:45 pm
Hallam-Peel & Co v London Borough of Southwark [2008] EWCA Civ 1120 is a second appeal from a wasted costs order against Hallam-Peel, a legal aid housing firm, made during stay of warrant proceedings at Lambeth County Court. [read post]
8 May 2009, 11:56 am by Liskow & Lewis
For more information on the proposed legislation, see www.nola.com/business/t-p/index.ssf/base/money-2   [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 6:05 pm
: NPR Blocking Obama's Health Plan Is Key to the GOP's Survival (Cato … Obama’s Healthy America Health Care The Obama Health Plan Emerges - WSJ.com Cassidy: Here’s how a viable health care reform plan might work   Obama Healthcare Plan To Provide ‘Affordable Options’ Protests at White House healthcare hearing in Iowa WH official: Economy adds urgency to health reform Maryland poised to receive $1.7B for health care… [read post]
18 Aug 2011, 10:48 am by NFS Esq.
Housing Authority (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 635 (Hanif),[1] Hamilton argued that because only the amounts paid by plaintiff and her insurer could be recovered, the larger amounts billed by the providers were irrelevant and should be excluded. [read post]