Search for: "State v. Holm"
Results 1061 - 1080
of 1,549
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Aug 2020, 4:30 pm
From Jennifer B. v. [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 12:02 pm
The respondent's skeleton argument cites in support of that proposition R v Gloucestershire County Council ex p Barry [1997] AC 584, esp at 604E-F and 605 (Lord Nicholls), R v East Sussex County Council ex p Tandy [1997] AC 714, esp at 747B (Lord Browne-Wilkinson), and Ali v Birmingham CC [2010] UKSC 8; [2010] 2 AC 39, at [4] -[6] (Lord Hope). [57] And finally, Bury v Gibbons was a case in which the Authority had simply ignored a request for an oral hearing… [read post]
3 Apr 2011, 12:02 pm
The respondent's skeleton argument cites in support of that proposition R v Gloucestershire County Council ex p Barry [1997] AC 584, esp at 604E-F and 605 (Lord Nicholls), R v East Sussex County Council ex p Tandy [1997] AC 714, esp at 747B (Lord Browne-Wilkinson), and Ali v Birmingham CC [2010] UKSC 8; [2010] 2 AC 39, at [4] -[6] (Lord Hope). [57] And finally, Bury v Gibbons was a case in which the Authority had simply ignored a request for an oral hearing… [read post]
8 Dec 2006, 3:30 pm
Miles was decided, the Court held in United States v. [read post]
14 May 2012, 3:13 am
Holmes Beach, FL : Gaunt, 2010 2 v. ; 33 cm. [read post]
3 Dec 2023, 5:00 am
Supreme Court decided a case, BMW of North America v. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 3:30 pm
” Holmes sued Love in California state court for $8 million, arguing that the tweet accused Holmes of bribery. [read post]
16 Oct 2022, 9:02 pm
Hildebrant (in 1916), to Smiley v. [read post]
5 Oct 2009, 1:49 pm
Holmes v. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 4:55 am
In 1964 (and indeed until the 2000s), and in some states until the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
13 Sep 2015, 9:01 pm
Bradwell v. [read post]
20 May 2009, 6:43 am
Lawrence v. [read post]
26 Mar 2009, 10:51 am
Perkins, 748 F.2d 1519, 1533 (11th Cir.1984); United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 11:26 am
See, e.g., Holmes v. [read post]
18 Sep 2010, 1:19 pm
In fact, “Oliver Wendell Holmes” never served on the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am
If that were the intention, one would have expected it to have been stated expressly. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 7:50 am
If that were the intention, one would have expected it to have been stated expressly. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 3:57 pm
”And finally, the usual passage from Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond-upon-Thames LBC [2009] UKHL 7 [at 51] is aired:a decision can often survive despite the existence of an error in the reasoning advanced to support it. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 3:57 pm
”And finally, the usual passage from Holmes-Moorhouse v Richmond-upon-Thames LBC [2009] UKHL 7 [at 51] is aired:a decision can often survive despite the existence of an error in the reasoning advanced to support it. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 1:26 pm
United States (1928) 277 U.S. 438, 470 (dis. opn. of Holmes, J.).) [read post]
