Search for: "Stockton v. Stockton" Results 161 - 180 of 257
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Dec 2010, 6:20 am by James Bickford
”  The Record of Stockton, CA also offers its opinion on the case. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 10:25 am
Interstate 10 cuts east from El Paso through rocky desert terrain and then morphs into two major interstate highways which meet at a V east of Van Horn. [read post]
12 Oct 2010, 1:49 am by sally
Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council v Fidler and others [2010] EWHC 2430 (Admin); [2010] WLR (D) 244 “The definition of ‘private hire vehicle’ in s 80(1) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, with its express exclusion of hackney carriages, had to be read into the references to ‘private hire vehicle’ in sections 46(1)(d)(e); and the words ‘hackney carriage’, where they appeared in s 80(1), were not confined to a vehicle… [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 2:10 pm by David Lat
[The Faculty Lounge]* Trial started today in Steptoe & Johnson v. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 5:47 am by David G. Badertscher
Supreme Court's decision this year limiting the extraterritorial application of U.S. securities laws in Morrison v. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 10:36 pm
The previous posts are the Introduction, Part I,Part II, Part III, Part IV and Part V.] [read post]
18 Sep 2010, 10:31 am by John McFarland
The suit, Mesa Water, L.P. and G&J Ranch, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Aug 2010, 4:08 am
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, No. 08-1214, the Supreme Court reinforced the courts’ role in deciding disputes over whether and when an agreement to arbitrate a dispute comes into existence.New York - Faragher-Ellerth defense not applicable under the New York City Human Rights LawKramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLPIn Zakrzewska v. [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 3:31 am by michael
Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott [2010] EWCA Civ 910; [2010] WLR (D) 216 “In determining pursuant to section 3A(1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 whether, for a reason which related to the claimant’s disability, he had been treated less favourably than a person to whom that reason did not apply, the appropriate comparator was someone who had acted in the same way as the claimant but did not suffer from his disability, and not someone to whom the… [read post]