Search for: "Hall v. Weare" Results 141 - 160 of 196
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jul 2011, 7:10 am
Peter street to Preservation Hall. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 7:10 am
Peter street to Preservation Hall. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 1:02 pm by George
v=mMDV3eISLPs ) GWG: hahaha, the force is strong Nick: but your deflections and reality will soon seal your fate GWG: btw I heard you and my ex had a heart to heart about me,  anything good? [read post]
13 Feb 2011, 2:43 am by SHG
Marshall’s most famous decision — Marbury v. [read post]
23 Jan 2011, 11:00 pm by Catriona Murdoch
Hall & Anor v Bull & Anor [2011] EW Misc 2 (CC) (04 January 2011) – Read judgment Judge Andrew Rutherford in the Bristol County Court has held that the devout Christian couple who ran their Cornish hotel according to their Christian principles directly discriminate against a homosexual couple in a civil partnership, when they refused accommodation to them on the basis that they only let double rooms to married couples. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 4:04 am by SHG
Via Orin Kerr and John Wesley Hall, a California Court of Appeals held that night vision goggles are a constitutionally acceptable means of seeing what you couldn't otherwise see. in People v. [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 2:54 pm by Mike
Ball's petition for habeas corpus causing Judge Marilyn Hall Patel to provide an “independent review of the record” See Green v. [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 8:26 am by Howard Friedman
However the court dismissed plaintiff's official capacity claims and claims for monetary damages under RFRA.In Hall v. [read post]
14 Aug 2010, 5:09 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Paper looks at tangible v. intangible property rights, and the customization we engage in when we tinker with something we own—the communicative value of a pair of jeans and how people change them/wear them. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 2:40 am by John L. Welch
Carroll Shelby and Carroll Hall Shelby Trust, Opposition No 91150346[Opposition to registration of the product configuration mark shown below, for automobiles, on the grounds of genericness, abandonment, fraud, failure to function as a mark, and collateral estoppel].April 20, 2010 - 2 PM: Vaad L'Harotzas Sichos, Inc. v. [read post]