Search for: "Matter of Spencer v Spencer"
Results 121 - 140
of 488
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 May 2010, 8:54 am
Also summarized the Spencer v. [read post]
18 Jun 2011, 12:52 pm
” Spencer v. [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 2:34 am
The Court held that the judge at first instance had not properly applied the legal test for the implication of contractual terms, as established in Marks & Spencer Plc v. [read post]
18 Sep 2010, 10:06 pm
In the Louisiana case of Harrell v. [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 2:57 am
Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer plc, heard 25 – 26 November 2013. [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 2:00 pm
In this regard counsel referred to Nettler & Nettler [2009] FamCAFC 185at [28], which identified this as the guiding standard in relation to the valuation of land, as articulated in Spencer v Commonwealth (1907) 5 CLR 418.The fact that a business does not sell need not be taken as indicative of the value of shares of a business; the test laid down in Spencer v Commonwealth can only be applied where there is a ready market, and is “of no… [read post]
24 Jun 2023, 12:20 pm
The FTC v. [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 1:51 am
Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer plc, heard 25 – 26 November 2013. [read post]
25 Apr 2018, 3:30 am
Procedural Matters Military judge Col. [read post]
29 Dec 2007, 8:46 am
State v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 3:49 pm
” Spencer v. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 3:51 am
Furthermore, while CPLR 306-b permits a court, in the exercise of its discretion, to [*2]extend the time to serve process upon good cause shown or in the interest of justice (see Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95, 101), the plaintiffs did not move for, or otherwise request, an extension in the Supreme Court (see Lehman v North Greenwich Landscaping, LLC, 65 AD3d 1293, 1295; Matter of Saltzman v Board of Appeals of Vil. of… [read post]
13 Nov 2006, 10:58 pm
In Lochner v. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 5:01 am
In Sines v. [read post]
27 Jul 2010, 8:05 am
In today’s case (Zale v. [read post]
6 Nov 2019, 4:01 am
“An extension of time for service is a matter within the court’s discretion” (Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95, 101 [2001]). [read post]
5 Apr 2019, 5:22 am
“An extension of time for service is a matter within the court’s discretion” (Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer, 97 NY2d 95, 101). [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 6:39 am
Pryor II v. [read post]
21 Dec 2021, 5:40 am
Although wordy and filled with dicta, the decision foreshadows ongoing litigation on the parameters of the act after a decade of relative quiet since the Fair Share Act was passed.In the case of Spencer v. [read post]
15 Dec 2015, 12:52 pm
In King v. [read post]
