Search for: "In the Interest of Michael F" Results 901 - 920 of 2,278
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Oct 2017, 5:00 am by Michael Risch
Electronic Arts, 841 F.3d 1062 (2016), and the petition (filed by David Nimmer, Peter Menell, and Kevin Green) is here. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
In this column, I will be reviewing a book written by my colleague, Sital Kalantry, entitled Women’s Human Rights and Migration: Sex-Selective Abortion Laws in the United States and India. [read post]
18 Oct 2017, 4:30 am by Michael J. Glennon
PDF version A review of Oona A. [read post]
9 Oct 2017, 6:58 am by Chris Castle
Scotto, 641 F.2d 47 (1980) for those reading along.) [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 4:00 am by Lyonette Louis-Jacques
The Illustrations of the Sachsenspiegel: A Medieval German Law Book (2000) by Guillermo F. [read post]
13 Sep 2017, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
” Here, given Michael’s status as a selectman and the content of the letters, it cannot be said that Michael’s “substantial privacy interests [were] invaded in an essentially intolerable manner. [read post]
  Document 7: 2015 Certification Exhibit F The subject matter of document 7 is unknown. [read post]
4 Sep 2017, 9:01 am by Benjamin Wittes
But the norm is that they have great freedom to discuss matters prosecutors cannot discuss; the main constraint on them is the duty to act in their clients’ interests. [read post]
1 Sep 2017, 10:30 am by Jane Chong
Treason and bribery are crimes, but none of the most important legal authorities on the subject—Charles Black, Raoul Berger, Cass Sunstein, Michael Gerhardt, Richard Posner, or Ronald Rotunda, to name a few—believe that only crimes qualify for the last and most important bucket of impeachable offenses, "high Crimes and Misdemeanors. [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 12:16 pm by Joel R. Brandes
It affirmed the award because it was not an improvident exercise of the court’s discretion.The Appellate Division held that absent an agreement to the contrary, or without engaging in a proper analysis under the paragraph “(f)” factors of the Domestic Relations Law, the court should not have ordered defendant to pay for summer and/or extracurricular activities (Domestic Relations Law § 240[1–b][f]; Michael J.D., 138 AD3d at 154). [read post]
29 Aug 2017, 12:16 pm by Joel R. Brandes
It affirmed the award because it was not an improvident exercise of the court’s discretion.The Appellate Division held that absent an agreement to the contrary, or without engaging in a proper analysis under the paragraph “(f)” factors of the Domestic Relations Law, the court should not have ordered defendant to pay for summer and/or extracurricular activities (Domestic Relations Law § 240[1–b][f]; Michael J.D., 138 AD3d at 154). [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 1:32 pm by Kevin LaCroix
I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this site’s readers. [read post]