Search for: "Land v. People"
Results 1501 - 1520
of 4,711
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Nov 2011, 11:46 pm
The police encountered twelve people at the home, but Bowen was not among them. [read post]
25 Jan 2009, 4:12 pm
Previous litigation over planning permission had been exhausted and, for the occupants, it was admitted that they occupied the land unlawfully. [read post]
25 Jan 2009, 4:12 pm
Previous litigation over planning permission had been exhausted and, for the occupants, it was admitted that they occupied the land unlawfully. [read post]
31 Dec 2008, 6:33 am
In 1868 in Paul v. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 3:34 am
I The champagne of trade mark disputes I Jaguar Land Rover DEFEND[ER]s its trade mark I Länsförsäkringar, Länsförsäkringar, bork, bork, bork! [read post]
22 Sep 2013, 7:58 am
Even a dull hook, however, can sometimes land a fish. [read post]
23 Jun 2015, 7:14 am
Where there were 41 clinics less than two years ago, there will soon be as few as eight in a state of 27 million people. [read post]
13 Aug 2019, 6:03 am
Patents In Nokia v. [read post]
4 Aug 2021, 3:08 am
As the Court held that the plaintiffs lacked standing, the ACA is still the law of the land. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 11:33 am
Flat fee v. pay per performance v. tournament—if you do very well, big payment, but otherwise nothing. [read post]
3 Apr 2010, 3:22 am
When our government charges different prices to different people for the same service, we cry “Unconstitutional! [read post]
21 Oct 2019, 8:24 am
However, the 1971 case of Blankenship v Wagner established outside back steps to a home were in exclusive control of the landlord even though many people used them. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 2:52 am
Background In Dr David Miller v University of Bristol [2024] ET 1400780/2022, the claimant was appointed Professor of Political Sociology at the University from 1 September 2018. [read post]
25 Apr 2007, 8:06 am
How ironic that a defender of Roe v. [read post]
1 May 2010, 4:34 pm
It was true that the terms of the leases prevented the claimants from living at the chalets on a permanent basis and that the President of the Lands Tribunal had, in King v Udlaw, felt this to be a reason why holiday chalets were not dwellings. [read post]
1 May 2010, 4:34 pm
It was true that the terms of the leases prevented the claimants from living at the chalets on a permanent basis and that the President of the Lands Tribunal had, in King v Udlaw, felt this to be a reason why holiday chalets were not dwellings. [read post]
14 May 2018, 8:58 am
It's the third trial in the first Apple v. [read post]
19 May 2013, 7:20 am
In US v. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 12:47 pm
Richards sought bond funding to expand prison capacity far beyond what was necessary to accommodate federal prison reform litigation (Ruiz v. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 12:18 pm
Exempt From CEQA Review People for Proper Planning v. [read post]
