Search for: "Phillips v. Phillips"
Results 1301 - 1320
of 3,828
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jan 2021, 3:11 am
The court correctly determined that the complaint is devoid of allegations from which it could be inferred that any negligence by defendants in their handling of the family court proceeding was the “but for” causation of any damages (see Dweck Law Firm v Mann, 283 AD2d 292, 293 [1st Dept 2001]; see also Phillips-Smith Specialty Retail Group II v Parker Chapin Flattau & Klimpl, 265 AD2d 208, 210 [1st Dept 1999], lv denied 94 NY2d 759 [2000]). [read post]
16 Mar 2012, 4:12 pm
In Phillips v. [read post]
Whether police in Florida can legally force you to unlock your cellphone. (FL Supreme Court Update).
28 Apr 2020, 6:25 am
In the case of Pollard v. [read post]
5 Apr 2007, 4:52 am
Phillips v. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 7:11 pm
Cir. 2012) (citing Phillips v. [read post]
31 May 2012, 9:49 am
In Bowers v. [read post]
25 Apr 2009, 9:33 am
I was in Washington earlier today to watch oral arguments in Ricci v. [read post]
24 May 2007, 5:20 am
” The Lord Chief Justice has stated clearly that “judicial independence cannot exist on its own”, Lord Phillips said. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 2:51 am
Lord Phillips would also dismiss the appeal but for different reasons. [read post]
27 Feb 2009, 4:49 am
And Jeremy Phillips (IPKAT) was responsible for the Berlin meeting. [read post]
8 Dec 2009, 8:07 am
The relatively recent case of Imation v. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 7:46 am
Tax systems treat taxpayers differently all the time, and the central question before the Court in Alabama Department of Revenue v. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 1:43 pm
In Sottilaro v. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm
The High Court in Phillips v Symes (No. 2) [2005] 1 WLR 2043 established that an expert witness was susceptible to the court’s jurisdiction under Section 51 (1) and (3) of the SCA 1981 to a personal costs order in respect of costs of litigation wrongly incurred or thrown away as a result of inappropriate evidence as an expert witness. [read post]
16 Jan 2019, 12:45 pm
At today’s oral argument in Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 2:44 pm
In the decision in Lawrence v. [read post]
5 Jun 2018, 8:23 am
As in Burwell v. [read post]
13 Aug 2014, 3:44 am
In the Trigger litigation, the Supreme Court held (Lord Phillips dissenting) on a consideration of Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services[5] that the relevant date on which employers’ liability insurance policies will be triggered is the date (or dates) on which the victim was exposed to the asbestos, not the date when mesothelioma first manifests in the victim. [read post]
1 Nov 2009, 11:19 pm
"Tokai Corp et al. v. [read post]
23 Jun 2009, 2:19 pm
The opinion followed a straightforward Phillips analysis for each term. [read post]
