Search for: "Tower v. Tower" Results 721 - 740 of 2,015
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Mar 2008, 4:21 pm
I’m eagerly awaiting the judgment in R(Weaver) v London & Quadrant, but, in one of those quirks of synchronicity, Bailii has just put the Court of Appeal Judgment in Donoghue v Poplar Housing & Regeneration Community Association Ltd & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 595 up online. [read post]
13 Feb 2023, 12:34 pm by Patricia Salkin
  New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC v Planning Board of the Town of East Hampton, 2022 WL 18859063 (EDNY 12/1/2022)    [read post]
” The Microsoft case is the second case the Supreme Court will hear this term that challenges interpretations of the aging Stored Communications Act (SCA)—the other being Carpenter v. [read post]
” The Microsoft case is the second case the Supreme Court will hear this term that challenges interpretations of the aging Stored Communications Act (SCA)—the other being Carpenter v. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 9:47 am by Dave
That proposition was effectively trumped by Terry Gallivan, Counsel for Islington, who relied on the contrary proposition in Akinbolu v Hackney LBC (1997) 29 HLR 259, 269 as well as that old chestnut R v Sec of State for the Environment ex p Tower Hamlets LBC [1993] QB 632, 643, neither of which had been cited to Collins J. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 9:47 am by Dave
That proposition was effectively trumped by Terry Gallivan, Counsel for Islington, who relied on the contrary proposition in Akinbolu v Hackney LBC (1997) 29 HLR 259, 269 as well as that old chestnut R v Sec of State for the Environment ex p Tower Hamlets LBC [1993] QB 632, 643, neither of which had been cited to Collins J. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 7:11 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
EFF: “The Supreme Court handed down a landmark opinion today in Carpenter v. [read post]
1 Feb 2009, 12:43 pm
            The Texas Court of Appeals heard a claim by the homeowners against their association in Martin v. [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 4:52 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Here, the plaintiffs [*2]failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for their default in opposing the defendant’s motion (see CPLR 5015[a][1]; Dokaj v Ruxton Tower Ltd. [read post]