Search for: "Matter of Kerr v Kerr"
Results 101 - 120
of 878
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Oct 2019, 4:18 am
Rivera v Kerr 2019 NY Slip Op 33047(U) October 11, 2019 Supreme Court, Suffolk County Docket Number: 17736/2015 Judge: Sanford Neil Berland is also notable for having 7 prior judges all recuse themselves. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 2:39 am
That brings us to the new case, Kahler v. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 1:25 am
The context is important. 11:29: Lord Kerr again questions the relevance of these submissions to this appeal. [read post]
18 Sep 2019, 1:18 am
1538: Aidan O’Neill QC submits that the role of this court is to rebalance the constitution. 1530: Aidan O’Neill QC refers to the decision in Padfield v Minister of Agriculture at page 1061 of the decision. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 1:26 am
Lord Kerr queries why the prorogation needed to cover the conference recess. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 7:28 am
Given the constitutional importance of the questions posed in this matter, eleven Justices will hear the appeals, being Lady Hale, President of the Supreme Court; Lord Reed, Deputy President of the Supreme Court; Lord Kerr; Lord Wilson; Lord Carnwath; Lord Hodge; Lady Black; Lord Lloyd-Jones; Lady Arden; Lord Kitchin; and Lord Sales. [read post]
6 Sep 2019, 10:41 am
Bank One, Tex., N.A. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2019, 12:16 am
Kerr, Searches and Seizures in A Digital World, 119 Harv. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 9:27 am
The judgments, and the differences of opinion expressed in them, exemplify the ongoing debate about the level of scrutiny and level of deference that the courts should apply, particularly when dealing with politically contentious issues and with matters falling within the realm of socio-economic policy. [read post]
1 Jul 2019, 8:23 pm
Last week, in Mitchell v. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 3:34 am
Carpenter v. [read post]
23 May 2019, 4:26 am
The Supreme Court’s Decision First Question The Supreme Court considered this question as a matter of construction. [read post]
22 May 2019, 4:58 pm
The Supreme Court’s Decision First Question The Supreme Court considered this question as a matter of construction. [read post]
21 May 2019, 12:34 pm
Even If Chalking Were a Search, It Is Reasonable as a Matter of Law California public agencies wishing to defend their chalking procedures may also argue that chalking without a warrant is reasonable as a matter of law notwithstanding City of Saginaw. [read post]
20 May 2019, 3:22 am
" See Miranda v. [read post]
14 May 2019, 3:22 am
And change in the law matters as well, for without it we would still be living under Plessy v. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 4:48 am
Jones and Carpenter v. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 5:26 am
Last month, in Commonwealth v. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 2:49 am
In a new case, Taylor v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 4:52 pm
In her judgment (Stocker v Stocker [2018] EWCA Civ 170), Sharp LJ remarked “…that the use of dictionaries does not form part of the process of determining the natural and ordinary meaning of words, because what matters is the impression conveyed by the words to the ordinary reader when they are read, and it is this that the judge must identify. [read post]
