Search for: "Line v. Line"
Results 8841 - 8860
of 45,531
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Oct 2007, 1:10 am
The Supreme Court heard argument Tuesday in the much-anticipated federal securities case, Stoneridge Investment Partners v. [read post]
16 Oct 2010, 10:20 pm
[Drug and Device Law; NYLJ; Boles v. [read post]
8 Jul 2008, 7:57 am
Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency [pdf] with a line from ... [read post]
29 May 2007, 2:20 pm
Savage of the LA Times reports here on the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Ledbetter v. [read post]
8 Jul 2008, 7:57 am
Massachusetts Housing Finance Agency [pdf] with a line from ... [read post]
22 Sep 2011, 5:09 am
USA v al-Kassar. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 8:08 am
In Coleman v. [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 5:36 pm
The Building Inspector determined that the two lots would not conform to the Code provisions as each lot would only have one “side” lot line and therefore would fail to satisfy the definition of “Depth of Lot” in the Code, and further the “second line” would fail to satisfy an additional requirement that the “lot depth [be] ‘measured in the general direction of its side lot lines. [read post]
16 Apr 2020, 3:57 am
” At the Volokh Conspiracy (via How Appealing), Orin Kerr urges the court to review Van Buren v. [read post]
12 Nov 2010, 1:04 pm
Maybe… The above scenario is exactly what happened in the NC Court of Appeals case, Smith Architectural Metals v. [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 5:36 pm
The Building Inspector determined that the two lots would not conform to the Code provisions as each lot would only have one “side” lot line and therefore would fail to satisfy the definition of “Depth of Lot” in the Code, and further the “second line” would fail to satisfy an additional requirement that the “lot depth [be] ‘measured in the general direction of its side lot lines. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 9:16 am
But if Douglas v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 1:55 am
On this line of reasoning, why would the judge refuse the requested Order? [read post]
8 Apr 2009, 5:04 am
Carroll v. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 8:18 am
Miranda was intended as a bright-line test for suspects receiving custodial interrogation. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 8:12 pm
See, e.g., Rehrs v. [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 11:22 am
Rodriguez and Sessions v. [read post]
10 May 2016, 7:51 pm
Or Washington v. [read post]
28 Feb 2024, 5:39 am
“Initially, many of plaintiff’s arguments are not reviewable by this Court as they either arise from Queens County Supreme Court orders that are not the subject of the instant notice of appeal (CPLR 5501[c]) or claims that were previously presented to, and decided by, the Appellate Division, Second Department (Sang Seok Na v Schietroma, 172 AD3d 1263, 1263 [2d Dept 2019]; Sang Seok NA v Schietroma, 163 AD3d 597, 597 [2d Dept 2018]; Sang Seok Na v… [read post]
