Search for: "In re Christopher B. (1978)" Results 1 - 15 of 15
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Sep 2011, 9:30 am by Roshonda Scipio
(RES) KF250 .F352 2010Legal WritingLegal writing / Richard K. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 2:00 am by Steve Lombardi
 The Cat From Outer Space - (1978) (Cat) (Ken Berry) 59. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (A) (a Child) (by her litigation friend B) v Secretary of State for Health, heard 2 November 2016. [read post]
31 Aug 2016, 6:57 am
Warner Comm., Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1104 (1985). [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 12:04 pm by admin
In “Cheng’s Proposed Consensus Rule for Expert Witnesses,”[1] I discussed a recent law review article by Professor Edward K. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 7:05 pm by Badrinath Srinivasan
We used to do a fortnightly post giving links and the abstracts to the articles published in the Social Science Research Network that are related to arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). [read post]
27 Dec 2008, 10:19 am
. * 1063: Béla I of Hungary died when his throne’s canopy collapsed. * 1135: Henry I of England is said to have died after gorging on lampreys, his favorite food. * 1219: According to legend, Inalchuk, the Muslim governor of the Central Asian town of Otrar, was captured and killed by the invading Mongols, who poured molten silver in his eyes, ears, and throat. * 1258: Al-Musta’sim was killed during the Mongol invasion of the Abbasid Caliphate. [read post]
10 Aug 2020, 2:24 am by Schachtman
A supreme flouting of the military and industrial contexts can be found in DeVries v. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
  SeeRestatement (Second) of Torts §134 & comment b (1970).Restatement of TortsThe heeding presumption is derived from language in Restatement (Second) of Torts §402A, comment j (1965) that dealt with the opposite situation − presuming that an adequate warning, when given, will be read and heeded. [read post]
24 May 2023, 6:37 am by Paula Junghans
Assistant District Attorney Christopher Conroy: “After the election, defendant reimbursed the lawyer through a series of disguised monthly payments that hid the true nature of the payoff by causing a series of false business records in the records of the Trump Organization here in Manhattan, and even mischaracterized for tax purposes the true nature of the payment. [read post]