Search for: "Head v. State" Results 1341 - 1360 of 13,578
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Feb 2017, 7:04 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
It is difficult to see the Supreme Court allowing the appeal, at least on the basis of the case as stated. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 1:41 am
There was no rule of construction and no rule of law which stated that a reinsurer must respond to every valid claim under the insurance irrespective of the terms of the reinsurance.The most important aspect to the decision was the way in which the Lords distinguished the present case from the decision of the House of Lords in Vesta v Butcher [1989] AC 852. [read post]
9 Oct 2007, 6:51 pm
  He had the whitest shirt on you ever see, too, and the shiniest hat; and there ain't a man in that town that's got as fine clothes as what he had; and he had a gold watch and chain, and a silver-headed cane -- the awfulest old grey-headed nabob in the State. [read post]
16 May 2011, 11:52 am by INFORRM
” In addressing this issue, Eady J referred to Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers (No 2) [1990] 1 AC 109, where the House of Lords had drawn a distinction between state secrets and confidential information relating to an individual’s private life. [read post]
3 Mar 2007, 4:25 pm
Day 3 of the Tampa adventure was back at Legends Field -- where my uncle, James Walsh, joined me for the Yanks v. [read post]
26 Sep 2019, 7:05 am by Eric Goldman
At $20/head (assuming multiple hidden mandatory fees), it will take 75,000 redirected tourists to generate enough revenue (not profit) to cover just the out-of-pocket costs of this lawsuit. [read post]
16 May 2014, 8:58 am
One mildly interesting (although inconsequential) construction point did raise its head at the end of the judgment. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 8:45 am
An article authorizing the town to borrow up to $200,000 to upgrade residential septic systems to comply with state Title V regulations. [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 5:05 am
District Court for the Western District, styled United States of America v Paul Hollern, Case No. 3:06CR-82-S. [read post]