Search for: "King v. Smith" Results 1 - 20 of 582
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2022, 9:35 am by INFORRM
On 11 October 2022 a unilateral statement in open court [pdf] was read before Nicklin J in the case of Smith v Backhouse. [read post]
24 May 2012, 2:45 pm
Edward Mylius repeated a rumour that accused King George V of marrying Queen Mary when – secretly – the King had already married someone else and had three children. [read post]
4 May 2019, 5:37 pm by Steve Kalar
  Facts: Queen Anieze-Smith, and her co-defendant, Abdul King Garba, owned a medical supply company. [read post]
4 Jun 2013, 5:31 pm by Michelle N. Meyer
Rather, my interest in King is in its implications for policies for the use of DNA in the criminal justice system. [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 7:22 am
NO-FAULT - VENUE - NEW YORK CITY CIVIL COURT ACT § 305(B)NK Acupuncture, P.C. a/a/o Taniya Smith-Jones v. [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 5:02 am by INFORRM
The decision of Mr Justice Peter Smith in Sports Direct International plc v Rangers International Football Club plc and another [2016] EWHC 85 (Ch) to refuse to commit the respondent for contempt for alleged breach of an injunction shows the caution that the court will sometimes show when it comes to seeking to enforce injunctive relief. [read post]
25 May 2012, 3:22 am by tracey
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Greene King Plc v Quisine Restaurants Ltd & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 698 (24 May 2012) Hinchcliffe & Anor v Smith & Ors [2012] EWCA Civ 696 (24 May 2012) Ingosstrakh -Investments v BNP Paribas SA [2012] EWCA Civ 644 (24 May 2012) Cavenagh v William Evans Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 697 (24 May 2012) High Court (Administrative Court) Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council, R (on the application of) v… [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 3:25 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Matter of Wiebke v Wiebke and Matter of McFarland v Smith similarly held that the determination of visitation is entrusted to the sound discretion of the trial court, and such determination should not be set aside unless it lacks a sound and substantial basis. [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 10:19 am by John Eastman
As it noted all the way back in 1838 in Kendall v. [read post]