Search for: "People v James Wells" Results 1921 - 1940 of 2,229
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Dec 2018, 4:36 pm by INFORRM
This has been established law since the decision in Clayton v Clayton [2006] EWCA Civ 878; [2007] 1 FLR. [read post]
16 Jul 2024, 4:06 pm by Jacob Fishman
For both, focusing on the actual people who practice, argue about, interpret, and implement international law is essential to explaining how international law works. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 4:47 am by Eric Turkewitz
New York has successfully been doing this for almost 200 years for verdicts that are unreasonable, since Chief Judge James Kent wrote the following in Coleman v. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 10:46 am by Frank O. Bowman, III
Republican politicians have embraced immigration as a potent political issue. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 8:52 am by Carolina Bracken
Looking to Strasbourg jurisprudence, he commented, “[t]he ECtHR will only find that the state has acted in violation of A1P1” if its judgment is “manifestly without reasonable foundation” (James v United Kingdom (1986) 8 EHRR 123). [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 1:47 pm
This list includes newly incorporated companies in Massachusetts (so-called "domestic corporations") as well as companies organized in other states that have filed to do business in Massachusetts (so-called "foreign corporations"). [read post]
21 May 2019, 11:57 pm by Florian Mueller
James Thompson (Qualcomm CTO) gave such long, fast, and practiced narratives on direct examination that Qualcomm's counsel had to tell the witnesses to slow down. [...] [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 4:03 am by INFORRM
’ On the other hand he is entirely in line with Wilson when he asks in the session with Lord Hall and James Harding: ‘Is it not critically important that different views on EU issues are always reflected in the BBC output? [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
The U.S. stands virtually alone, among constitutional democracies with well-established judicial review by independent courts, in providing neither for a retirement age nor for a limited term in office for its high court justices. [read post]