Search for: "State v. Borough"
Results 1021 - 1040
of 1,324
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Oct 2010, 3:03 pm
Pieretti v London Borough of Enfield [2010] EWCA Civ 1104 This is an odd case, in lots of ways, but what is decided in this appeal to the Court of Appeal is potentially of broader significance and certainly useful as clarification. [read post]
12 Oct 2010, 7:39 am
Guarnieri (Granted )Docket: 09-1476Issue(s): Whether state and local government employees may sue their employers for retaliation under the First Amendment’s Petition Clause when they petitioned the government on matters of private concern.Certiorari-Stage Documents:Opinion below (3d Circuit)Petition for certiorariBrief in oppositionPetitioners' replyAmicus brief of Pennsylvania State Association of Boroughs Title: DePierre v. [read post]
12 Oct 2010, 7:37 am
The Third Circuit Court rejected that argument in a case growing out of a running feud between Duryea’s Borough Council and the local chief of police (Borough of Duryea v. [read post]
10 Oct 2010, 10:04 pm
The recent case of Asda Stores Ltd v Wandsworth London Borough Council [2007,] concerned the interpretation of a number of provisions in the Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995 (“the Regulations”), which implemented Council Directive (EC) 93/43. [read post]
9 Oct 2010, 9:04 pm
The recent case of Asda Stores Ltd v Wandsworth London Borough Council [2007,] concerned the interpretation of a number of provisions in the Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995 (“the Regulations”), which implemented Council Directive (EC) 93/43. [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 8:20 pm
The recent case of Asda Stores Ltd v Wandsworth London Borough Council [2007,] concerned the interpretation of a number of provisions in the Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995 (“the Regulations”), which implemented Council Directive (EC) 93/43. [read post]
7 Oct 2010, 8:05 pm
The recent case of Asda Stores Ltd v Wandsworth London Borough Council [2007,] concerned the interpretation of a number of provisions in the Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995 (“the Regulations”), which implemented Council Directive (EC) 93/43. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 6:34 am
GuarnieriDocket: 09-1476Issue(s): Whether state and local government employees may sue their employers for retaliation under the First Amendment’s Petition Clause when they petitioned the government on matters of private concern.Certiorari-Stage Documents:Opinion below (3d Circuit)Petition for certiorariBrief in oppositionPetitioners' replyAmicus brief of Pennsylvania State Association of Boroughs Title: Madison County v. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 7:42 am
DECISIONS Sackett v. [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 11:15 am
Entertainment Merchants Ass’n (challenging, on First Amendment grounds, a California state ban on the sale of violent video games to minors) and Snyder v. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 6:52 am
Section 6(3) states that it is immaterial whether a belief is justified or not if it is honestly held. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 4:05 am
The complaint (full text) in Cadalzo v. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 9:00 am
Merton London Borough Council, [1978] A.C. 728. [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 9:39 am
The case is United States v. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 1:13 am
Her case against Ofsted, the Secretary of State for Children and Families and the London Borough of Haringey, which will now go to the Court of Appeal, is one of the many ripple effects of the scandal, alongside the government’s recent announcement that it would review the child protection system. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 3:35 am
” He quoted and approved the statement of Lord Bingham in K & Ors v Lambeth Borough Council explaining why the doctrine of precedent must operate in this way: There is a more fundamental reason for adhering to our domestic rule. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 10:52 am
Title: State of South Carolina v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 5:00 am
Borough of Bernardsville,929 F.2d 927, 930 (3d Cir.1991); Heir v. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:59 am
Goremsandu, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Harrow [2010] EWHC 1873 (Admin) As many of you will know the definition of an HMO for the purposes of Council Tax is totally different from that used in the Housing Act 2004 (and in relation to planning uses classes). [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:59 am
Goremsandu, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Harrow [2010] EWHC 1873 (Admin) As many of you will know the definition of an HMO for the purposes of Council Tax is totally different from that used in the Housing Act 2004 (and in relation to planning uses classes). [read post]
