Search for: "GRANT II v. BAKER III"
Results 1 - 20
of 97
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Oct 2023, 7:54 am
II. [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 9:31 am
ERISA Disability Plans III. [read post]
22 Jan 2023, 6:59 pm
” Slip op. at 62 (quoting from Gerber v. [read post]
4 May 2022, 1:06 pm
See generally the non-exhaustive list of factors set out in the judgment of Scott Baker J in R (Khan) v London Borough of Newham [2001] EWHC Admin 589 at paragraphs 8 to 14. [read post]
18 Dec 2020, 10:55 am
Turning to functionality, Arnold provides a detailed account of the law from Navitaire v EasyJet, Nova v Mazooma and of course SAS v WPL. [read post]
16 Nov 2020, 6:06 pm
Beckham in Baker v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 6:48 am
C v D [2007] EWCA Civ 1282). [read post]
6 Oct 2020, 8:42 am
Creditors who grant and/or carry out servicing activities for certain mortgage loans (where debtors are individuals), are required to register with the BoS. [read post]
1 May 2020, 2:11 am
., up to EUR 300 bn of loans granted to companies facing cash shortages as a result of this crisis. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 6:03 am
., Appellant, v. [read post]
22 Apr 2020, 1:43 pm
Activities Prohibited During the moratorium, a court may not, for a “non-essential eviction,” (i) accept the filing of a summons or complaint, (ii) enter a judgment for possession for a plaintiff, (iii) issue an execution for possession, (iv) deny a request for a stay of execution or a continuance, or (v) schedule a court event, including a summary process trial. [read post]
21 Apr 2020, 9:03 am
Except for emergency evictions, courts may not (i) accept a writ, summons, or complaint, (ii) enter a judgment, default judgment, or execution for possession, (iii) issue an execution for possession, (iv) deny a tenant’s request for a stay of execution or continuance of a summary process case, or (v) schedule any court event, including a summary process trial. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 7:35 am
Bowman III. [read post]
2 Oct 2019, 10:21 am
The district court granted the request for expert witness fees, but denied the personnel expense request finding that the phrase “all the expenses of the proceedings” was not specific and explicit to include such expenses due to the presumption under the “American Rule” that litigants pay their own attorneys’ fees (quoting Baker Botts L.L.P. v. [read post]
11 Aug 2019, 8:50 am
On July 25, 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada granted leave in 9147-0732 Québec inc. c. [read post]
26 Apr 2019, 9:53 am
See Barnett v. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 7:07 am
Menell and David Nimmer in a separate submission also highlight inconsistency with SCOTUS’s seminal decision in Baker v. [read post]
23 Dec 2018, 7:53 am
Having thoroughly considered the parties' briefing and the relevant record, the Court finds oral argument unnecessary and hereby GRANTS the motion in part and DENIES the motion in part for the reasons explained herein.I. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 2:20 pm
Baker, Venable LLP, pro hac vice, Jamie Lynne Edmonson, Venable LLP, Katherine M. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 11:21 am
We have a baker’s dozen of new relists this week. [read post]
