Search for: "Crossley v. California" Results 1 - 7 of 7
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Mar 2019, 1:00 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
Pharmaceutical Pricing Jaime King, University of California Hastings College of the Law, The Burden of Federalism: Challenges to State Attempts at Controlling Prescription Drug Costs Marc Rodwin, Suffolk University Law School, Controlling Pharmaceutical Prices: What the U.S. [read post]
10 Oct 2017, 5:52 am by Barry Sookman
Crossley, “Case Law, Hamburg District Court: Max Mosley v Google Inc”, online: Inforrm’s Blog”. [read post]
27 Apr 2017, 1:30 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
John's University School of LawKatherine Schostok, DePaul University College of LawAllison Winnike, University of Houston Law Center 5:00 – 7:00 PM Welcome Reception – Henson Atrium, Georgia State Law Friday, June 9, 20177:30 – 8:15 AM Registration & Breakfast – Henson Atrium, Georgia State Law 8:15 – 8:30 AM Opening Remarks – Ceremonial Courtroom, Georgia State LawWendy Hensel, Interim Dean and Professor of Law, Georgia State University College of… [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 4:32 pm by INFORRM
  One inevitably pictures a disinterested spotty nineteen year old in California conducting what the courts have described as an “intense focus” between competing rights. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 9:36 am by INFORRM
There were also several resolved complaints, including: Mr Charles Tubbs v Daily Mail, No clause specified, 29/04/2013; Dr John Little v The Daily Telegraph, Clause 1, 26/04/2013; Mrs Deborah Farrell v That’s Life, Clause 1, 25/04/2012; Jessica Westwood v The Mail on Sunday, Clause 1, 25/04/2013; Neil Turner v The Daily Telegraph, Clause 1, 25/04/2013; Ms Judy Gibbons v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 25/04/2013; A woman v Daily Mail, Clause… [read post]
22 Oct 2010, 7:18 am by GuestPost
However, in some circumstances, such as a childless, short marriage without pooling of assets a prenuptial agreement may have ‘magnetic importance’ for the division of assets (as shown in Crossley v Crossley [2008] 1 FLR 1467). [read post]