Search for: "People v. Miller" Results 221 - 240 of 1,467
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Feb 2014, 10:29 am
The landowner's actions relying on a valid permit must be so substantial that the municipal action results in serious loss rendering the improvements essentially valueless" (Town of Orangetown v Magee, 88 NY2d at 47-48; see Glacial Aggregates LLC v Town of Yorkshire, 14 NY3d at 136; People v Miller, 304 NY at 109; Matter of RC Enters. v Town of Patterson, 42 AD3d at 544; People ex rel. [read post]
26 Nov 2019, 1:58 pm by Patricia Hughes
Earlier this month, the Ontario Divisional Court released its decision (by the Court) in Canadian Federation of Students v. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 1:56 pm
about the "kill zone" theory in the recent case of People v. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 11:54 am by David Super
Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939), held that issues concerning how the Constitution is amended are “political questions” into which the courts may not intervene. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 5:12 pm by Colin O'Keefe
- Ontario lawyer Chris Jaglowitz of Gardiner Miller Arnold on the firm's Ontario Condo Law Blog Kiobel Gets a Kissing Cousin: DC Circuit Holds TVPA Does Not Apply To Non-Natural Persons - New York attorney Russell Jackson on his blog Consumer Class Actions & Mass Torts How Does D'Oench, Duhme Apply to Failed Credit Unions: Campbell v. [read post]
16 Aug 2006, 6:14 am
The recent judgments of the House of Lords in Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24, [2006] 1 FLR 1186 point to the urgent need for the courts to set aside the preposterous contention that it is 'substantially uncontestable' that substantial harm to the public would arise if prenuptial agreements were enforceable. [read post]