Search for: "State v. C. R."
Results 9041 - 9060
of 13,581
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2011, 3:00 am
Ramos in Stulman v. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 5:22 pm
R. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 1:44 pm
Martini of Robb Leonard Mulvihill and Attorney William C. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 11:32 am
In Estes v. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 8:41 am
In a judgment of November 17, 2011, the first chamber of the European Court of Justice ruled in Hypotecní banka a.s. v Lindner (case C-327/10) that defendants with unknown domicile are domiciled at their last known domicile for the purpose of the Brussels I Regulation. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 6:25 am
He stated his V-shaped Korea recovery model was premised on the Chinese stabilizing their chaotic economy within this year. [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 8:40 pm
Marshall. http://t.co/Jht3buj B-MD: Whether debtor is a "business trust" per §101(9)(A)(v) is a federal question independent of state law rules. http://t.co/BD1KjrL B-MD: Debtor is "business trust" per §101(9)(A)(v) if "primary purpose" is to carry on business & not to preserve res. http://t.co/BD1KjrL B-NJ: §506(b) applies only to postpet. int/fees/costs; prepet. penalties/int/fees/costs governed by… [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 7:55 am
United States v. [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 3:40 am
” 16 Lee R. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 4:00 pm
Supreme Court decision, Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 11:26 am
Might work better if claims were confined to copyright v. patent w/r/t software? [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 2:54 pm
In Josendis v. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 2:47 pm
R. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 1:33 pm
In Leader v. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 5:17 am
Admittedly the Justice case recently experienced a vogue of attention in the United States, particularly among lawyers looking for possible precedents for bringing charges against the authors of the “torture memos” in Bush’s Justice Department.[4] But even this brief renaissance of interest quickly waned as the precedential relevance of the Justice appeared smaller than hoped.[5] The fact that the NMT program has long been treated as nothing more than a footnote to the IMT… [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 7:19 pm
A seismic shift in the state's civil litigation landscape was felt on June 28 when state Gov. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 12:43 pm
Prob C § 16010; Schwartz v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 11:08 am
In any event, the Appellate Division stated that his contention was without merit because the father's income for the purpose of calculating his child support obligation includes imputed income (Family Ct Act 413[1][b][5][iv], [v] ), and thus his income was above the federal poverty income guidelines (see generally s 413[1][g]; Matter of Julianska v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 11:08 am
In any event, the Appellate Division stated that his contention was without merit because the father's income for the purpose of calculating his child support obligation includes imputed income (Family Ct Act 413[1][b][5][iv], [v] ), and thus his income was above the federal poverty income guidelines (see generally s 413[1][g]; Matter of Julianska v. [read post]
