Search for: "People v. House"
Results 901 - 920
of 11,166
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jun 2018, 12:53 pm
Bd. of Ed. v. [read post]
2 Sep 2020, 12:21 am
The first is Palestine Solidarity Campaign Ltd: a company dedicated to support of the rights of the Palestinian people and opposing racism. [read post]
18 Jul 2016, 5:01 am
A recent Tax Court case, Jackson v. [read post]
25 May 2021, 10:46 am
” The court identifies other federal claims preempted by Section 230, including the Fair Housing Act (Chicago Lawyers v. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 3:59 pm
A national database exists which will house all this information. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 3:30 am
How dumb can some people be? [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 3:00 am
In Make UC A Good Neighbor v. [read post]
30 May 2023, 12:29 pm
I suspect they will be preoccupying quite a few people for a while. [read post]
10 Apr 2018, 4:13 pm
Background In December 2016, a group of 30 people complained in vain about articles in the Times and Sunday Times that misreported a meeting they had attended in the House of Lords. [read post]
16 Dec 2024, 7:57 am
Case citation: M.H. v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 2:02 pm
Term Limits v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 2:35 pm
Term Limits v. [read post]
21 May 2012, 12:54 pm
In Burnip v Birmingham CC, Trengove v Walsall MBC, and Gorry v Wiltshire C [2012] EWCA Civ 629, the Court of Appeal considered whether the application of the bedroom rule in the housing benefit regulations as regards private rented accommodation discriminated against those who needed an extra bedroom for a carer or because their children could not share a room as a result of disability (see here for our discussion of the Upper Tribunal decisions). [read post]
21 May 2012, 12:54 pm
In Burnip v Birmingham CC, Trengove v Walsall MBC, and Gorry v Wiltshire C [2012] EWCA Civ 629, the Court of Appeal considered whether the application of the bedroom rule in the housing benefit regulations as regards private rented accommodation discriminated against those who needed an extra bedroom for a carer or because their children could not share a room as a result of disability (see here for our discussion of the Upper Tribunal decisions). [read post]
26 Oct 2019, 9:27 am
Case citation: Wexler v. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 10:48 am
The following is an essay for our symposium on Arizona v. [read post]
19 Jul 2016, 9:02 am
Rubin, has been denied the ability to purchase a unit in Kennedy House, Inc., a “residential cooperative building” with a no-pet policy, because she was unable to prove that her dog provides assistance for her claimed disabilities, as recently decided by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania in Kennedy House Inc v Philadelphia Comn on Human Relations, 2016 WL 3667992 (Pa. [read post]
15 Oct 2018, 2:24 pm
But the theory is that it makes people less hesitant -- in other circumstances -- to steal from actual stash houses since there's at least some chance that they're simply being set up by the government.No one on the panel especially likes those cases. [read post]
24 Aug 2006, 2:09 pm
Murphy v. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 6:55 am
In 2005, Succar v. [read post]
