Search for: "State v. C. M. B." Results 121 - 140 of 3,318
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Dec 2013, 1:35 am by David Kopel
Based on the attorney’s answers, if X+A are married, and they cohabit with B then C then D, there will be no prosecution. [read post]
20 Jun 2011, 6:45 pm by Dan Bushell
  And correspondingly, would the decision's effects extend to: (a) only civil right cases; (b) all (b)(2) classes; or (c) all class actions? [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 6:37 am
  The court begins the opinion by explaining thatVickie M. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 2:49 pm
The application was rejected pursuant to Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of the CTM Regulation and the examiner stated that Maharishi had failed to prove that the sign had acquired distinctive character through use in Belgium and France, ex Article 7(3). [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 5:17 pm
It's late and I'm very tired tonight, so I'll grab Judge Erdmann's helpful synopsis of his opinion of the court in United States v. [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 3:13 am by Sean Patrick Donlan
' Jane Matthews Glenn, 'Mixed jurisdictions in the Commonwealth Caribbean: mixing, unmixing, remixing' Dale Beck Furnish, 'The law of the Navajo Nation: a three-ingredent mix of consensual (indigeous) and adversary (common law) systems' Esin Örücü, 'Turkey's synthetic legal system and her indigenous socio-cuture(s) in a "covert" mix' Marissa Herbst and Willemien Du Plessis, 'Customary law v common law marriages:… [read post]
26 Jul 2020, 6:09 am by Mark S. Humphreys
  The case is styled, Shiv Partners LTD and Shiv Host, LLC D/B/A La Quinta Inn & Suites v. [read post]
17 Aug 2012, 4:09 pm by Eugene Volokh
(Eugene Volokh) I’m pleased to say that the New Mexico Supreme Court will hear the Willock v. [read post]