Search for: "Housing Authority v. Superior Court" Results 481 - 500 of 835
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Feb 2010, 12:28 pm by NL
Sheffield City Council v Oliver LRX/146/2007 meant that the covenant applied by force of statute. b) If that was wrong, as a local housing authority the Council have wide powers to manage their stock as they see fit and it would not be consistent with the existence of these wide powers if individual leaseholders were able to demand that insurance must be provided in a particular manner or with a particular provider. [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 12:28 pm by NL
Sheffield City Council v Oliver LRX/146/2007 meant that the covenant applied by force of statute. b) If that was wrong, as a local housing authority the Council have wide powers to manage their stock as they see fit and it would not be consistent with the existence of these wide powers if individual leaseholders were able to demand that insurance must be provided in a particular manner or with a particular provider. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 7:33 pm
The doctrine on this is a bit complicated, but I think it is fair to say that the four leading Supreme Court cases --- Raley v. [read post]
16 Aug 2015, 9:01 pm by Neil Cahn
Charging the parties with acting more like children, throwing tantrums, teasing and name-calling, Justice Grossman, in his decision in L.T. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 11:07 am by Bill Otis
The Department decided otherwise, and lined up in the Supreme Court taking Dickerson's side (I believe there was White House input in that decision, although I was never directly told).I should add here that my immediate superior, the Clinton-appointed US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Helen F. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 5:31 am by Legal Beagle
The full opinion of Lord Brodie:HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY [2016] HCJAC 93 HCA/2016-24/XJNOTE BY LORD BRODIE in BILL OF SUSPENSION by CLYDE AND CO (SCOTLAND) LLP Complainers;against THE PROCURATOR FISCAL, EDINBURGH Respondent:Complainers:  Smith QC; Clyde & CoRespondent:  No appearance22 July 2016[1]        The complainers in this bill of suspension are a limited liability partnership, being solicitors with a place of business at Albany… [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
The panel includes the author of The Rutter Group’s UCL treatise and is moderated by the author of the “The UCL Practitioner” blog and plaintiffs’ oral advocate before the California Supreme Court in Brinker. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 2:20 pm by Erin Miller
Clearing House Association, L.L.C., 129 S. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 1:36 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
They may be used against you in court to deny your claim. [read post]
4 Jun 2008, 7:31 am
Pam KarlanRick Hills's recent post over at Prawfsblawg on the Supreme Court's decision in Riley v. [read post]