Search for: "State v. Tate"
Results 61 - 80
of 446
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Oct 2022, 10:46 am
Given that “[s]tates rarely relinquish their sovereign powers,” she asserts, the Supreme Court has required “a clear statement in a compact that they have done so”. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 1:55 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 20/10/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Fearn and others v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery heard 7th December 2021… [read post]
17 Oct 2022, 1:34 am
Reference by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland – Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Northern Ireland) Bill, heard 19th July 2022 R (on the application of VIP Communications Ltd (In Liquidation)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 4th October 2022 McCue (as guardian for Andrew McCue) (AP) v Glasgow City Council, heard 18th October 2022 Unger and another (in substitution for Hasan) v Ul-Hasan (deceased) and another, heard… [read post]
10 Oct 2022, 1:00 am
Reference by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland – Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Northern Ireland) Bill, heard 19th July 2022 R (on the application of VIP Communications Ltd (In Liquidation)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 4th October 2022 of DCM (Optical Holdings) v Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, heard 12th October 2022. [read post]
5 Oct 2022, 4:20 am
On Tuesday 4th October, the Court heard the case of R (on the application of VIP Communications Ltd (In Liquidation)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. [read post]
14 Sep 2022, 7:45 am
Mail-order retailers, for instance, have to comply with the often byzantine tax rules of many states, even though "[s]tate taxes differ, not only in the rate imposed but also in the categories of goods that are taxed and, sometimes, the relevant date of purchase. [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 11:06 am
From the Minnesota Court of Appeals' majority opinion yesterday in State v. [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 10:56 am
Supreme Court ruled in Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 12:15 pm
The post JABARI JAHI TATE v. [read post]
23 Aug 2022, 11:10 am
Ericsson Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jul 2022, 5:01 am
And earlier, in the two-stage State of Eritrea v. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 2:29 am
AA (Nigeria), RA (Iraq) and HA (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKSC 22 – on appeal from [2020] EWCA 1296 and [2020] EWCA 1176. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 5:01 am
Community College v. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 4:43 am
This means that if a departing partner takes a contingent fee case and subsequently litigates it to settlement or verdict, the dissolved firm is entitled to the value of the case at the date of dissolution, with interest, or, “[s]tated conversely, the lawyer must remit to his former firm the settlement value, less that amount attributable to the lawyer’s efforts after the firm’s dissolution” (Murov v Ades, 12 AD3d 654, 656 [2d Dept 2004]). [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 3:07 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 6/7/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Harpur Trust v Brazel, heard… [read post]
4 Jul 2022, 1:00 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 6/7/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Harpur Trust v Brazel, heard… [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 1:00 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 29/6/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard 13th-14th October… [read post]
20 Jun 2022, 1:45 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 22/6/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard 13th-14th October… [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 2:56 am
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 15/6/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and Ors, heard 4 May 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Basfar v Wong, heard 13th-14th October … [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 12:01 pm
First, in July 2021, the FTC announced a settlement with Richard Berry, the owner and manager of four auto dealers, in the FTC’s action against Tate’s Auto for misrepresenting and falsifying terms in advertisements. [read post]
