Search for: "State v. Land"
Results 1541 - 1560
of 13,213
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Aug 2020, 6:58 am
Lebov, LLC v State of New York, 2020 WL 4197130 (NYAD 2 Dept 7/22/2020) [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 8:04 pm
Div. 1984), and avulsion (a sudden removal or addition to land as a result of either natural or manmade forces), Garrett v. [read post]
2 Dec 2018, 4:21 pm
Pulte Home Corp. v Montgomery County, 2018 WL 6204906 (4th Cir. [read post]
3 Sep 2021, 5:00 am
Co-author David Leonard McFarland Land & Cattle, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jul 2022, 8:55 am
Here is the abstract: In Cedar Point Nursery v. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 3:33 pm
WildEarth Guardians v. [read post]
11 Apr 2009, 12:21 pm
Thanks to my fellow Damon Key land user Greg Kugle for letting me know the Federal Circuit has affirmed Palmyra Pacific Seafoods, L.L.C. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2016, 8:22 am
In Sliski v. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 9:44 am
In Golden Gate Land Holdings, LLC v. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 5:30 pm
Hitchcock, Oliphant v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 5:30 am
., v. [read post]
1 Jul 2008, 4:08 pm
The district court found tribal court jurisdiction proper under the first exception outlined in Montana v. [read post]
1 Sep 2022, 1:28 pm
The court’s full ruling in State of Louisiana et al. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 2:28 pm
North Carolina Supreme Court Decision On June 10, 2016, in the case of Kirby v. [read post]
27 Jul 2022, 2:09 pm
Residents in this category who need an abortion will be faced with an impossible choice: giving birth and caring for a baby they do not want and likely cannot afford to raise, or traveling out of state for an abortion and risking a violation of their parole or probation conditions, which could land them back in prison. *** Around 666,400 women are on parole or probation at any given day in the U.S., according to a recent Prison Policy Initiative report. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 11:05 pm
Islamic Organization, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2016, 10:55 pm
DePolo v. [read post]
2 Mar 2025, 10:51 am
Brown v Ridley & Anor (Rev1) (2025) UKSC 7 The Supreme Court considered para 5(4) to Schedule 6 Land Registration Act 2002 on the requirements for an application for registered title through adverse possession of land adjoining the applicant’s land. [read post]
2 Aug 2007, 11:41 pm
In Washington v. [read post]
6 May 2011, 6:46 am
Michigan tried it a few years ago, and its testing program was struck down as unconstitutional in a case called Marchwinski v. [read post]
