Search for: "State v. Cross #2" Results 141 - 160 of 7,614
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Feb 2024, 5:38 am by Guest Author
 7410(a)(2)(D)(i), recognizes the federal government’s indispensable role in protecting against the cross-border pollution that is a structural hazard in a federal system. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 6:39 am by John Coyle
[This post is cross-posted at Transnational Litigation Blog] [read post]
19 Feb 2024, 1:45 am by INFORRM
On 14 February 2024 there was a strike out/summary judgment application in the case of Chowdhury-v-Secretary of State for the Home Department KB-2023-003368. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 4:27 am by Allan Blutstein
It’s a sensible distinction in my opinion, given the facts.(2) Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. [read post]
The full media release can be accessed here. 2             ASIC proposes temporarily extended relief from disclosure and reporting consistency obligations for super trustees On 6 November 2023, ASIC commenced consultation on a proposed extension of the exemption from the consistency obligations in ASIC Class Order CO 14/541(CO 14/541)for two years. [read post]
15 Feb 2024, 9:22 am by centerforartlaw
(Accent Delight), an offshore company with Dmitry Rybolovlev as the ultimate beneficial owner, v. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 3:44 pm by Michael Lowe
According to the USSC: 9% had little or no prior criminal history (Criminal History Category I); 7% were CHC II; 8% were CHC III; 2% were CHC IV; 5% were CHC V; 9% were CHC VI. [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 1:02 am by INFORRM
Reserved Judgments Nagi v Sinniah Santhiramoulesan, heard 22 and 23 January 2024 (Collins Rice J) Sinton v Maybourne Hotels Limited, heard 19 and 20 December 2023 (Chamberlain J) Dyson v Channel 4, heard 15 December 2023 (HHJ Lewis) Pacini v Dow Jones, heard 13 December 2023 (HHJ Parkes KC) Amersi v BBC, heard 8 December 2023 (HHJ Lewis) Wilson v Mendelsohn and others, heard 4 to 8 December 2023 (HHJ Parkes KC)… [read post]
10 Feb 2024, 4:24 am by Alessandro Cerri
 Further, the Court stated that it is an established principle of settled case-law that, as a general rule, the submission of facts and evidence by the parties remains possible after the expiry of the relevant time limits, and the EUIPO is not prohibited from taking account of such facts and evidence (mobile.de v EUIPO, C‑418/16 P).In this case, it was accepted by both parties that Mr Noah had submitted the first evidence of use of the Mark within the time limit set by… [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 7:24 am by Guest Author
” As stated by Justice Rehnquist in his concurring opinion in Industrial Union Dept., AFL-CIO v. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 8:44 am by Eric Goldman
Since we affirm the district court’s rulings on the state law claims, we need not resolve the federal law cross appeal. [read post]