Search for: "C.M." Results 81 - 100 of 196
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2014, 9:48 am by WSLL
Day, JudgeRepresenting Appellant: C.M. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 6:00 am by Yosie Saint-Cyr
Braithwaite, C.M., O.Ont., Q.C., by Stanley C. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 3:32 am by Peter Mahler
In previous work (Brooks, R., Landeo, C.M., and Spier, K.E., “Trigger Happy or Gun Shy: Dissolving Common-Value Partnerships with Texas Shootouts,” The Rand Journal of Economics, pp. 649-673 [2010] (available on SSRN here)) we provide a theoretical analysis of this topic. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 3:09 am by Peter Mahler
Dissolution cases involving deadlocked 50/50 owners of closely-held business entities present some of the most intractable problems likely to be encountered by business divorce practitioners and judges. [read post]
17 Nov 2013, 7:37 am
In a case recently discussed in the New York Law Journal, C.M. v. [read post]
23 Apr 2013, 7:25 pm by Aaron Weems
C.M. case (in which the Superior Court upheld the right to a de novo review of a parent coordinator’s decision) judges may need to brace themselves to deal with an increased amount of "some talent show communication[s]. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 6:01 pm by oliver randl
Rogers then recused themselves in order to avoid the appearance of partiality.The following decision on their exclusion was taken by the Board in the following decision: C.M. [read post]
16 Feb 2013, 7:46 am by pittsburghlawfirm
On appeal, the Superior Court in the A.H. case held that the trial court erred in failing to hold a de novo hearing on C.M. [read post]
16 Feb 2013, 7:46 am by pittsburghlawfirm
On appeal, the Superior Court in the A.H. case held that the trial court erred in failing to hold a de novo hearing on C.M. [read post]
16 Feb 2013, 7:46 am by pittsburghlawfirm
On appeal, the Superior Court in the A.H. case held that the trial court erred in failing to hold a de novo hearing on C.M. [read post]
27 Jan 2013, 4:00 am by Administrator
C.M. 2012 NBCA 45Civil Rights - Right to counsel – Appointment of counsel by the court or the state – Where party unable to represent self The New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench, Family Division, in decisions not reported in this series of reports, ordered that state-funded counsel be provided to C.M. and P.M., respondents in a guardianship application made under s. 56(1) of the Family Services Act (N.B.). [read post]