Search for: "Short v. Downs" Results 1221 - 1240 of 7,203
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2008, 12:14 am
When it comes right down to it, this blog is part of the marketing I do as a lawyer, and I've made a lot of friends, met a lot of great people. [read post]
21 May 2019, 5:23 am by ASAD KHAN
This view gives a narrow and literalist approach to the test of inability – that the British citizen would be “unable” to remain in the UK/EEA if the third country national left – laid down in reg 15A. [read post]
7 May 2012, 8:46 pm by Rumpole
On Thursday in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, the court hears Shelton v. [read post]
21 Jun 2015, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
Supreme Court handed down its decision legalizing abortion, Roe v. [read post]
7 Feb 2013, 5:15 pm by Old Fox
An opening in the front of boxer shorts worn by Jewish men. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 4:22 pm by INFORRM
Since Mrs Justice Collins Rice handed down judgment in Fox v Blake [2024] EWHC 146 (KB) there has been a lot of online discussion about the case. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 2:47 am
Florida and Sullivan v. [read post]
31 Dec 2016, 6:59 am by Law Offices of Jeffrey S. Glassman
  Even if they intimately fall short of reshaping the treatment paradigm, they may still yield very important results. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 9:39 am
  The kids in the books had real problems, and they were kind of bringing her down. [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 2:38 am by CMS
In this post, Adam Ferris (Senior Associate) in the Finance Disputes Team at CMS and Henry Powell (Associate) in the Real Estate Disputes Team at CMS comment on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Byers and Ors v Saudi National Bank [2023] UKSC 51, which was handed down on 20 December 2023. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 3:19 pm
., in other cases the prosecutor or public defender may have in front of this judge.In short, I'm not at all sure what the right rule should be. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 4:49 pm by INFORRM
In the post ZXC v Bloomberg era, the reasoning behind the Department of Justice’s decision to create a criminal offence to protect the same interests, and to extend its applicability to a quarter of a century after death, remains opaque. [read post]