Search for: "HARMS v. HARMS"
Results 9921 - 9940
of 36,797
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Apr 2013, 10:51 am
The Texas juvenile justice system has come a long way since the case that exposed these widespread abuses: Morales v. [read post]
14 Jul 2023, 11:52 am
And they should respect the Supreme Court’s holding in Carpenter v. [read post]
12 Apr 2017, 9:20 am
This ruling can be objected by the other parent on the following grounds: The move poses a threat or potential harm to the child The relocating parent’s intentions are vindictive The move has no reasonable purpose In this case, the father’s motives were not harmful or vindictive, and his relocation served a reasonable purpose, so the mother had no grounds for objection. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 5:00 am
In Erie Insurance Exchange v. [read post]
13 May 2013, 1:05 pm
See Gresser v. [read post]
23 May 2013, 11:26 am
In a 2012 Pennsylvania custody case, V.B. and C.B. v. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 2:28 am
Luckily, the highest court in the European Union has, yet again, graciously stepped up to the challenge to answer this question.The case in question was Pez Hejduk v EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH, decided only a bit over a month ago. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 12:48 pm
In Lujan v. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 4:27 pm
See McBean v. [read post]
12 Mar 2014, 3:23 pm
The Court of Appeals most recently analyzed the specific scope and application of "particular effect" jurisdiction in Matter of Taub v Altman (2004). [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 3:47 am
FA v MA [2021] The mother had failed to comply with the orders of the court which stated that the father was to have contact with the child. [read post]
19 Mar 2007, 4:11 am
Moreover, how does one harm a colour's distinctiveness? [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 2:24 pm
In People v Orlewicz, No. 285672, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s order granting a new trial and affirmed the defendant’s convictions and sentences in charges arising from a murder. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 4:17 am
The plaintiff’s allegations of “intentional harm,” which the Supreme Court properly interpreted as stating a cause of action alleging prima facie tort, were unsupported by facts demonstrating that the defendants acted with “malicious intent or disinterested malevolence” in the prior action (Ahmed Elkoulily, M.D., P.C. v New York State Catholic Healthplan, Inc., 153 AD3d 768, 772 [2017]; see Dorce v Gluck, 140 AD3d 1111, 1112… [read post]
28 Aug 2019, 4:44 am
The plaintiff’s allegations of “intentional harm,” which the Supreme Court properly interpreted as stating a cause of action alleging prima facie tort, were unsupported by facts demonstrating that the defendants acted with “malicious intent or disinterested malevolence” in the prior action (Ahmed Elkoulily, M.D., P.C. v New York State Catholic Healthplan, Inc., 153 AD3d 768, 772 [2017]; see Dorce v Gluck, 140 AD3d 1111, 1112… [read post]
25 Mar 2012, 3:22 pm
[Post by Venkat Balasubramani] Sterk v. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 9:24 am
To end its term, the Supreme Court today issued its long awaited opinion in Ricci v. [read post]
2 Jan 2023, 3:03 pm
Co. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 1:13 pm
The Bidding Agreements have also harmed the search engines by degrading the overall quality of the product they offer to consumers. [read post]
18 Jan 2022, 2:58 am
Bid-rigging can also be prosecuted under section 380(1) of the federal Criminal Code (the general fraud offence) as “other fraudulent means”, as was the case in R. v. [read post]
