Search for: "Bailie v. State"
Results 1 - 20
of 30
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2017, 5:16 am
Ornamentality v. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 5:16 am
Ornamentality v. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 11:19 am
Court Denies "Alternate Theory of Guilt" Motion for DismissalUnited States of America v. [read post]
8 Nov 2007, 12:10 pm
State of Indiana (NFP) C.F. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 4:38 am
Moreover, “[a]llegations regarding an act of deceit or intent to deceive must be stated with particularity. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 8:46 am
The Court of Appeal have refused permission to appeal in Brent LBC v Stokes [2010] EWCA Civ 626 (not on Baili yet) - we reported the High Court judgment here, which contains the summary of the facts and the important decision of King J. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 8:46 am
The Court of Appeal have refused permission to appeal in Brent LBC v Stokes [2010] EWCA Civ 626 (not on Baili yet) - we reported the High Court judgment here, which contains the summary of the facts and the important decision of King J. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 5:28 am
In R(Hamid) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 3070 (Admin) [not on Baili yet, but apparently on Lawtel], the Divisional Court signalled its intention to get much tougher on out of hours administrative court applications to the duty Judge. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 3:17 am
Thanks to the virtual telegraph, I’ve had the transcript in R (Coombes) v Secretary of State for CLG and Waltham Forest LBC [2010] EWHC 666 (Admin) for a few days (but it still does not appear on Baili, although, I gather, is available on Westlaw and the like), but a variety of circumstances (man flu/an excellent conference/family holiday culminating in a dramatic late night trip to a&e with my eldest, who’s absolutely fine, thanks) have prevented me from… [read post]
25 Apr 2007, 10:00 am
As in Baily (v. [read post]
28 Dec 2012, 11:05 am
An odd appeal on an adverse possession case, of no legal interest per se, but entertaining on the facts.Devanney v LB Hounslow [2012] EWCA Civ 1660 [not on baili yet. [read post]
28 Dec 2012, 11:05 am
An odd appeal on an adverse possession case, of no legal interest per se, but entertaining on the facts.Devanney v LB Hounslow [2012] EWCA Civ 1660 [not on baili yet. [read post]
17 May 2010, 9:42 am
LB Lambeth v Emeter [2010] EWCA Civ 527 [not on Baili, note from a transcript] This was a renewed permission to appeal hearing which foundered on Mr Emeter's complete lack of Agatha Christie-esque skills in plotting, detail and making evidence ambiguous. [read post]
17 May 2010, 9:42 am
LB Lambeth v Emeter [2010] EWCA Civ 527 [not on Baili, note from a transcript] This was a renewed permission to appeal hearing which foundered on Mr Emeter's complete lack of Agatha Christie-esque skills in plotting, detail and making evidence ambiguous. [read post]
20 Sep 2021, 7:14 am
which he concludes thusly:The California Supreme Court in the recent decision Daly v. [read post]
14 Dec 2008, 2:08 am
On top of this, with the FTC v. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 10:53 am
The question here, though, was whether the bedroom tax policy is “manifestly without reasonable foundation” because the bedroom tax involved a question of high policy – the Secretary of State relied on Humphreys v HMRC [2012] 1 WLR 1545, which, in turn, had applied Stec v UK (2006) 43 EHRR 1017 to argue for a different test depending on the ground of discrimination and the type of policy. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 10:53 am
The question here, though, was whether the bedroom tax policy is “manifestly without reasonable foundation” because the bedroom tax involved a question of high policy – the Secretary of State relied on Humphreys v HMRC [2012] 1 WLR 1545, which, in turn, had applied Stec v UK (2006) 43 EHRR 1017 to argue for a different test depending on the ground of discrimination and the type of policy. [read post]
11 Oct 2021, 11:06 am
Anonymous #1, now pending in Brooklyn state trial court.] [read post]
26 Nov 2018, 4:16 am
” “Here, accepting the facts alleged in the complaint as true, and according the plaintiff the benefit of every possible favorable inference, the plaintiff stated a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice (see Tooma v Grossbarth, 121 AD3d at 1095-1096; Endless Ocean, LLC v Twomey, Latham, Shea, Kelley, Dubin & Quartararo, 113 AD3d 587, 589; Reynolds v Picciano, 29 AD2d 1012, 1012). [read post]
