Search for: "Austin v. Succession of Austin"
Results 121 - 140
of 424
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Feb 2024, 9:08 am
The configurations are endless: What if each successive injury affects a different body part? [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 1:36 pm
When UT-Austin was temporarily barred from using race by a 1996 Fifth Circuit ruling in the case of Hopwood v. [read post]
2 Nov 2014, 5:13 pm
The first challenge to a photo ID law to reach the Supreme Court—Crawford v. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 12:28 pm
Davis et al, New York State Supreme Court, New York County, and SEC v. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 8:27 am
In last week’s Fisher v. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 12:56 pm
CORE v. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 2:55 pm
In Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 (NAMUDNO) v. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 3:50 pm
University of Texas at Austin (5th Circuit 2011) 631 F.3d 213, Ms. [read post]
13 Mar 2009, 10:59 am
Randall v. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 8:00 am
This internal documentation may be the framework of a successful prosecution of the case. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 9:31 am
" Since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, Congress has reauthorized Section 5 several times, most recently in 2006 -- for 25 additional years.The Litigation Challenging Section 5In Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. [read post]
2 Jan 2009, 2:58 pm
Austin, __ M.J. ___, Misc. [read post]
28 May 2011, 5:06 pm
” The Court, that brief went on, had used in Beaumont the same reasoning against corporate giving when it decided the 1990 case, Austin v. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 11:21 am
Fortunately, Texas case law allows a successful claimant to recover attorney’s fees. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 2:00 am
The BC Court of Appeal in Austin v Goerz noted, for instance, that “intestacy legislation has always recognized that concurrent claims can be made by both the lawful married partner of the deceased and by a person whose entitlement is advanced on the basis of a marital equivalent relationship with the deceased. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 2:00 am
The BC Court of Appeal in Austin v Goerz noted, for instance, that “intestacy legislation has always recognized that concurrent claims can be made by both the lawful married partner of the deceased and by a person whose entitlement is advanced on the basis of a marital equivalent relationship with the deceased. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 8:26 am
Today, as reported by the Northwest Austin Court, “[v]oter turnout and registration rates … approach parity. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 8:51 am
"Jack" Archer, a successful oil-and-gas businessman, married and divorced 4 times but had no children. [read post]
25 Aug 2009, 7:05 am
In Austin v. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 4:10 pm
In South Carolina v. [read post]
