Search for: "Word v. U. S" Results 1921 - 1940 of 2,468
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jun 2012, 10:29 am by Jeff Gamso
In this regard, the words of the United States Supreme Court in the case of In re Little (1972), 404 U. [read post]
21 Nov 2008, 11:42 am
[U]nlike the locked file cabinet, computers have no handle to pull. [read post]
26 May 2023, 1:00 pm by Joel R. Brandes
  In Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea v Bafna-Louis, 2023 WL 2387385 (S.D.N.Y., 2023) the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (the “RBKC”) brought a petition for the return of CBL and Baby L to the United Kingdom pursuant to the Hague Convention. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 3:43 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
” If an operating agreement contains the word “shall” in the context of advancement or indemnification, the right generally should be considered “mandatory” (Comer v Krolick, 2015 NY Slip Op 32274(U) [Sup Ct NY County Dec. 2, 2015]). [read post]
4 Oct 2015, 11:24 pm by INFORRM
 The jury was discharged after counsel’s closing speeches because the plaintiff’s counsel had, contrary to the judge’s earlier rulings, mentioned damages figures to the jury. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 12:03 pm by Susan Brenner
Valdez made a U-turn, drove back, and stopped in front of Villa's group. [read post]
21 Apr 2011, 1:36 pm by Bexis
  Id. at *1-2That’s one.Next, in Green v. [read post]
11 Jul 2022, 1:29 am by INFORRM
 Read the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)’s summary here. [read post]