Search for: "In Re United States, Petitioner"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,833
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Aug 2022, 10:03 am
Respondent averred that Petitioner consented to Respondent removing the children to the United States. [read post]
4 Mar 2021, 10:13 am
Respondent further testified that she never spoke to petitioner about “how long the trip [to the United States] [wa]s going to be,” nor did she “know that [she] was going to stay” in the United States ahead of time. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 1:05 pm
Judge Miller denied the ore tenus motion and reset the case to commence re-trial July 16, 2102. [read post]
29 Jul 2012, 7:30 am
Petitioner contended he exercised this right in Germany by allowing Kaan to visit the United States with his mother and that Respondent violated it by remaining in the United States longer than they had agreed. [read post]
25 Apr 2019, 11:24 am
As Petitioner stated in her verified petition, “Petitioner never acquiesced or consented to the relocation of Z.F.M.Z. in the United States. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 12:06 pm
United States v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 8:41 am
After their marriage in 1999, Petitioner and Respondent moved to the United States. [read post]
20 Jun 2020, 1:50 am
BREAKING NEWS: In re: Michael T. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 12:04 pm
United States, 10-6549, relisted 1/7, 1/14; and Howes v. [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 5:11 am
United States, 442 F.3d 770, 775 (2d Cir.2006); United States v. [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 5:15 pm
It appears that the United States Supreme Court views supplemental proceedings alleging violation of a civil order of protection as a species of criminal contempt. [read post]
19 Mar 2023, 9:21 am
Introduction This year, the United States Supreme Court heard its first major case on the corporate attorney-client privilege in decades. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 6:39 am
The children were removed from Honduras and brought to the United States in January 2022. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 2:52 am
Nahshin became the owner of the mark in the United States through the distribution of the product.From 2003 to 2007, Respondent purchased Petitioner's NIC-OUT product from Maslov and distributed the product for him. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 9:51 am
And, after a really long break, we're back. [read post]
16 Dec 2023, 6:34 am
United States</em>? [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 8:00 am
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has issued the long-awaited decision in the case 08-964 Bilski et.al. v. [read post]
15 May 2013, 12:55 pm
Res. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 10:29 am
The most notable example of this practice is the Supreme Court’s own 1942 decision in United States v. [read post]
6 Dec 2017, 2:48 pm
And if it comes to the United States, you can seize it. [read post]
