Search for: "AUSTIN v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY"
Results 101 - 120
of 121
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Oct 2009, 5:53 am
The legislation would bar a religious organization from doing what a Methodist Church did in New Jersey, when it would not rent its beach pavilion for a civil-union ceremony, even though the pavilion has been open to public use. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 10:48 am
Code §§ 22.1-79, 22.1-125; compare New Jersey v. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 10:01 pm
New Jersey: New Jersey Family Law by Charles C. [read post]
13 Sep 2009, 4:38 pm
It should also be noted that, although the Association initially lost its tax exemption, the State of New Jersey reinstated the Association's exemption from property tax for the beach and the rest of the boardwalk, but stated that it could not continue to exempt the pavilion as it was not truly open to the public. [read post]
24 Jul 2009, 5:25 pm
iPhone Application Calculates Texas Child Support - Dallas lawyer Jimmy Verner of Verner & Brumley P.C. in the firm's North Texas Divorce & Family Law Blog The State of eDiscovery in Delaware, Pt. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 1:33 am
"
New Jersey Shore Builders Ass'n v. [read post]
24 Jun 2009, 1:52 am
The 8-1 ruling in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 1:19 am
"
New Jersey Law JournalÃâ [read post]
9 Apr 2009, 4:23 pm
Kugler of the District of New Jersey. [read post]
23 Dec 2008, 1:00 pm
Essentially ignoring two New Jersey Supreme Court decisions (Rowe and Sinclair), the court applies New Jersey law to a case having nothing to do with the state (other than the defendant having shipped the product in question from New Jersey). [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 10:36 pm
Austin, ___ S.E.2d ___, 2008 WL 4762052, at *3-4 (Ga. [read post]
13 Dec 2007, 12:22 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
27 Nov 2007, 12:05 am
United States. [read post]
17 Oct 2007, 1:01 am
Supreme Court in 2005 upended the federal sentencing guidelines in United States v. [read post]
7 Aug 2007, 1:11 am
Supreme Court's landmark Brown v. [read post]
22 May 2007, 2:29 pm
Rasmussen, "The Story of Case v. [read post]
3 May 2007, 10:20 am
App. 1975) (a "state can never sue in tort in its political or governmental capacity"), aff'd, 356 N.E.2d 561 (Ill. 1976).Chicago v. [read post]
3 Apr 2007, 11:30 am
Super. 313 (1987)]: Transcript of Proceedings 6 v. (1988) New Jersey. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 12:04 am
The ruling in United States v. [read post]
30 Jan 2007, 2:49 pm
Does 1-41 (Austin, TX)SONY v. [read post]
