To: From: Date: June 10‚ 2004 Subject: Grandparent’s Visitation MEMORANDUM Based on the limited facts‚ the Johnson Superior Court should‚ at the least‚ modify the Agreed Entry between the parties that‚ among other things‚ granted Catherine McHugh (hereinafter the “grandmother”) visitation of the minor child Christopher A. Cronin (hereinafter the “child”). There is an issue as to whether the grandmother is entitled to visitation rights to the minor child and whether the bad relationship
Premium Appeal Court Family
cases. Common law was made by judges through decisions of the courts. A common law system follows the policy of stare decisis. The Court system is made up of many levels. There are 3 structures of the federal courts. The district courts‚ Courts of Appeals (appellate court) and Supreme Courts are made up in the federal court system. The appellate courts have no
Premium United States Law Supreme Court of the United States
Polyfoam the sum of P925‚ 117.35. On Chen’s appeal in CA-GR CV 55741‚ the Court of Appeals (CA) rendered judgment on August 12‚ 2002‚ modifying the RTC decision by limiting the amount of the summary judgment against Chen to only P654‚ 301.02‚ which amount the Court of Appeals said Chen admitted owing to Polyfoam in her answer. The Court of Appeals ordered the case remanded to the lower court for further proceedings. Issue: Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the summary judgment
Premium Appeal Pleading Quezon City
complaint recd. in : 26.07.2013. Information Commission on. Information sought : Seeks information of records related to application moved against FIR No.345 dated 15.12.2012 P.S. Civil Lines‚ Batala‚ DSP City‚ Batala. Grounds for appeal. Denial of information Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing : The PIO submitted that the case related to FIR No.345 dated December 15‚ 2012 is in the court and challan was submitted on 20.05.2013 in the court of Addl District
Premium Punjab Appeal Punjabi language
Court of Appeals of Oklahoma Long Arm Statute Brooks v. Magna Verde Corp .‚ 1980 Ok. Civ. App. 40‚ 619 P.2d 1271‚ Web 1980 Okla. Civ. App. Lexis 118 (Court of Appeals of Oklahoma) OPINION OF HONARABLE CARMON C. HARRIS This case raises the question of jurisdiction of a lawsuit in the state of Oklahoma where the alleged crime was committed. Whether it is in state or federal jurisdiction to handle an intrastate lawsuit. The judge questioned whether it was in his jurisdiction to handle
Premium Appeal Oklahoma Oklahoma City
JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT IN CORPORATE MATTERS PROLOGUE:- Legislature has always attempted to enact so much comprehensive law as nothing is left out of it’s ambit. This must always have been present in the mind of the legislature that conflicts and disputes of legal nature are part and parcel of every transaction and corporate sector is no exception to it. The need to resolve these disputes primarily needs a body
Premium Jurisdiction Court Appeal
Ronald A. Swoboda v. HERO DECKS‚ A Division of Parody Productions‚ LLC. No. 2009-CA-1303. Court of Appeal of Louisiana‚ Fourth Circuit. March 31‚ 2010. 1. FACTS: Parody Productions‚ LLC is a company that sale his playing cards over the internet. The product portrays well-known players from a sports team’s history. The plaintiff in this suit‚ Ronald Swoboda‚ is included in the New York Mets Hero Deck. Swoboda claims that he has never given Parody permission to use his image. He further contends
Premium Jurisdiction Law United States
Top of Form Bottom of Form Disciplinary Action Flowchart Employment-Law-Compliant Guide to Stages of Disciplinary Procedure Welcome to Employment Law Clinic’s disciplinary flowchart. This tool is designed to assist employers in ensuring you properly understand all the steps necessary in dealing with a disciplinary process; if you follow all the steps this should help protect you from having to defend an unfair dismissal – or at least allow you to defend an unfair dismissal effectively‚ as the guidance
Premium Employment Appeal
Chapter 2 The Court System N.B.: TYPE indicates that a question is new‚ modified‚ or unchanged‚ as follows. N A question new to this edition of the Test Bank. + A question modified from the previous edition of the Test Bank. = A question included in the previous edition of the Test Bank. TRUE/FALSE QUESTIONS 1. Laws would be meaningless without the courts to interpret and apply them. ANSWER: T PAGES: Section 1 TYPE: + BUSPROG: Analytic AICPA: BB-Legal 2. The federal courts are superior
Premium Trial court Appeal Civil procedure
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION ON APPEAL FROM THE CROWN COURT BETWEEN: BILLY Appellant -and- R Respondent __________________________________________ APPELLANT’S SKELETON ARGUMENT __________________________________________
Premium Criminal law Acts of the Apostles Law