Search for: "MATTER OF ADOPTION OF A J R" Results 161 - 180 of 1,714
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Dec 2009, 6:15 pm by Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
The court held that substance matters, not form, when government adopts a resolution of taking. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Section 8371.The Supreme Court adopted the two-part test enunciated in the case of Terletsky v. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2018, 3:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
May 4, 2018 Nealon, J.), Judge Terrence R. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 4:11 pm by INFORRM
  The defendants argued that, in terms of r 5.17 of High Court Rules and s 7 of the Defamation Act 1992— each communication of defamatory matter is a separate actionable publication; multiple causes of action must be pleaded separately, each delineated by some introductory phrase; it must be made clear upon which particular pleaded facts each cause of action is based; a separate remedy must be sought for each cause of action; and provision by the plaintiff of further… [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 10:56 am
"Read more in this article by Patrick J. [read post]
31 Aug 2010, 5:32 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Johns-Manville, 494 A.2d 1088, 1097-1098 (Pa. 1985) in which §908(2) of the Restatement (Second) of Torts was adopted. [read post]
12 Oct 2018, 12:23 pm by Mark Ashton
Here the post separation conduct seems reflective of what occurred when C.G. and J. [read post]
14 Apr 2021, 3:05 am by Giesela Ruehl
Its aim was to examine the legal framework concerning civil and commercial matters involving intellectual property rights that are connected to more than one State and to address the issues that had emerged after the adoption of several legislative proposals in this field in different regions of the world. [read post]
6 Apr 2016, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Feb. 29, 2016 Bowes, J.), the Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that the trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of a Defendant pet-sitter in a dog bite case. [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
   The court noted that, by simply adopting social policies for campus activities, the college did not create an in loco parentis type of duty on the part of the college. [read post]