Search for: "Bodie v Bodie" Results 9661 - 9680 of 21,355
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Mar 2015, 12:33 pm by Bill Otis
His body was covered with scrapes, bruises and perforations from blast debris.Many of the injuries were likely to result in death. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 11:00 am by Benjamin Wittes
The tipping point was Smith v Ministry of Defence (2013). [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 7:19 am by Joy Waltemath
The Second Circuit rejected the plaintiffs’ assertion that by relying on a rate set by a legislative body outside the surrounding counties, the law infringed on the fundamental right to representation in the legislative process and warranted strict judicial scrutiny. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 3:59 pm by Giles Peaker
Hardy, R (on the application of) v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [2015] EWHC 890 Oh, we have been waiting for this one. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 12:47 pm by Lyle Denniston
The ruling in the case of Grady v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 11:55 am
There was no intrusion into the body here, unlike a case such as Winston v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 10:39 am by Kelly Buchanan
Lord Denning in Miller v Jackson Also in the 1970s, English judge Lord Denning wrote one of his most famous judgments in a case that involved a dispute over cricket balls being hit out of a village cricket ground onto a neighboring property. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 9:42 am
Category: Recent Decisions;Employment Opinions;Contract Law Opinions Body: AC35682 - Madigan v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 8:54 am
Category: Recent Decisions Body: AC36275 - North Star Contracting Corp. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 8:48 am
Category: Recent Decisions;Contract Law Opinions Body: AC36635 - O, R & L Commercial, LLC v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 12:52 am
Bearing this in mind, Case T 378/13 Apple and Pear Australia Ltd and Star Fruits Diffusion v OHIM, Carolus C. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 2:25 pm by Giles Peaker
Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd [2015] UKSC 15 When the Court of Appeal held that a disability discrimination defence to possession under Equality Act 2010 had to face the same ‘seriously arguable’ summary test as an Article 8 defence, we were surprised, and very unimpressed. [read post]