Search for: "Dodge v. Dodge" Results 1181 - 1200 of 1,711
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jun 2011, 10:56 pm by Matthew Flinn
Lumba A similar question had been addressed by the court in R (Lumba) v Secrteary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 12 – another case involving the detention of a foreign national prisoner. [read post]
27 May 2011, 5:17 am
This is the second time this Term they have dodged a case: Remember Tolentino v. [read post]
24 May 2011, 10:55 pm by Maria Roche
 The Court held that: Decisions weighing the public interest in deportation against the private interest of the appellant and his family in his private and family life are often difficult and cannot easily be categorised as perverse” [§23] Lord Justice Longmore referred to MA (Somalia) v SSHD [2010] UKSC 49 when the Supreme Court reminded the Court of Appeal that it: should not be astute to characterise as an error of law what is no more than a… [read post]
23 May 2011, 5:54 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
In this case, an age discrimination case is revived because there was pretext all over the place, along with some ageist jokes.The case is O'Reilly v. [read post]
16 May 2011, 9:21 pm
Nick Bolter of the London office of Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge explained that in the UK there are bifurcated proceedings, i.e. two trials - one for liability and one for damages. [read post]
16 May 2011, 7:07 am
" The court's interpretation of an insurance policy's language was central to the summary judgment in the recent case of Newman v. [read post]
11 May 2011, 4:43 am by Susan Brenner
Occasionally the calls made threats . . . telling him, for example, he need[ed] to get on out of Dodge. [read post]
3 May 2011, 1:35 am by Melina Padron
On the naughty step April 26, 2011 Adam Wagner Doctors not entitled to be judged by independent panel April 26, 2011 Martin Downs What can we do about foreign criminals “using family rights to dodge justice”? [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 8:36 am by PaulKostro
Pascale, 113 N.J. 20, 29 (1988); In re Dodge, 50 N.J. 192, 216 (1967); Hill v. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 6:02 am by Bexis
Cutter Dodge, Inc., 47 P.3d 1222, 1232 (Haw. 2002), the Hawaii Supreme Court stated:[Plaintiffs] may not recover damages for emotional distress. [read post]