Search for: "Phillips v. Superior Court" Results 101 - 120 of 192
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Oct 2011, 9:39 am
The State responded the next day by filing a Notice of Related Case with the Superior Court. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 10:15 am
Spallas (collectively, plaintiffs) asserted claims against Fotouhi for violating the partnership agreement and filed a petition in the superior court to compel arbitration. [read post]
4 Jul 2011, 8:53 am by Edward Craven, Matrix.
At the same time, in Eba v Advocate General for Scotland the Supreme Court decided an identical issue in relation to the Upper Tribunal in Scotland and the Scottish High Court of Justiciary. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 8:16 am by Tim Eavenson
All the while, the world is waiting with bated breath to see what the Supreme Court has to say about Dukes v. [read post]
18 May 2011, 10:23 am by Kenneth Vercammen
On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Probate Part, Sussex County, Docket No. [read post]
18 May 2011, 10:23 am by Kenneth Vercammen
On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Probate Part, Sussex County, Docket No. [read post]
16 May 2011, 7:37 am by Bill Raftery
Brien Pending, probably dead Iowa HR 49 Impeachment Supreme Court Justice Daryl Hecht Same sex marriage decision Varnum v. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 5:49 pm by Peter Tillers
Together with Lothar Phillips he developed the concept of quantitative justice and fairness and its impact on decision systems, and on the idea of humanity. [read post]
17 Apr 2011, 11:04 am by PaulKostro
” The action is to be commenced by the filing of a complaint in the Superior Court, Chancery Division and an order to show cause, which shall state the amount of commissions and attorney’s fee, if any, which are sought. [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 12:42 pm by Nicholas Gibson, Matrix.
The Divisional Court ordered that the following two questions be tried as preliminary issues: first, whether the designation of the Upper Tribunal as a “superior court of record” of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, s 3(5) meant that its decisions were not amenable to the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court; and, secondly, whether the decision which Mr Cart sought to challenge was amenable to judicial review. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 6:06 pm by Law Lady
Medicaid Services: SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE IF CALIFORNIA CAN CUT MEDICAID PAYMENTS, Maxwell-Jolly v. [read post]