Search for: "State v. Mahr"
Results 1 - 20
of 40
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Mar 2024, 4:05 am
In Omid v. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 4:39 pm
This was also reaffirmed, specifically in the context of the Mahr, in Khamis v. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 4:39 pm
This was also reaffirmed, specifically in the context of the Mahr, in Khamis v. [read post]
25 Sep 2023, 6:05 am
From Khan v. [read post]
28 Jun 2023, 4:00 am
In Alulddin v. [read post]
14 Aug 2022, 1:26 am
Tahir Khan, Family Law: Islamic Marriage and the Legal System: Mahr/Dowr. [read post]
22 Mar 2022, 4:10 am
In Parbeen v. [read post]
17 Mar 2022, 8:06 am
From Parbeen v. [read post]
27 Nov 2021, 6:26 am
Slip Op. 06460 (1st Dept.,2021) the Appellate Division held that Family Court could exercise subject matter jurisdiction in this family offense proceeding notwithstanding that the offenses occurred out of state (see Opportune N. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 4:01 am
The court held that the enforcement provision Article V (1) lit. a New York Convention applies already before or during arbitral proceedings. [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 9:27 am
” Here, the court’s determination to deny defendant’s request for attorney’s fees was largely based on its assessment of defendant’s credibility at trial regarding the state of her own finances, her failure to fully account for large sums of money that she had received, and her failure to fully account for assets belonging to plaintiff that she purportedly used for his benefit during the period they were separated. [read post]
1 Sep 2020, 11:01 am
” Hewitt v. [read post]
21 Aug 2020, 1:59 am
Mann v. [read post]
21 Aug 2020, 1:59 am
Mann v. [read post]
6 May 2020, 5:02 am
[So a Maryland appellate court held last month, I think quite correctly (and consistently with the broad trend in other states):] From Nouri v. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 4:05 am
In Seifeddine v. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 3:26 pm
A Michigan appellate court correctly enforces a Muslim couple's "mahr" agreement, entered at the time of the couple's marriage and calling for the husband to pay certain funds to the wife -- it's a valid contract, enforceable under secular law, regardless of its religious motivation.From Ali v. [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 10:33 am
In the case of Minkin v. [read post]
30 May 2015, 5:42 am
United States. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 10:30 pm
The New Jersey case Odatalla v. [read post]
