copy and paste this google map to your website or blog!
Press copy button and paste into your blog or website.
(Please switch to 'HTML' mode when posting into your blog. Examples: WordPress Example, Blogger Example)
Input Form:Deal with this potential dealer,buyer,seller,supplier,manufacturer,exporter,importer
(Any information to deal,buy, sell, quote for products or service)
Romano v. Romano: Another Seismic Shift in Nevada Family Law . . . In 2022, Nevada witnessed yet another seismic shift in family law In Romano v Romano,1 the Nevada Supreme Court significantly modified the standard to be used when considering a modification of joint physical custody In an attempt to clarify the standard, the court reviewed its decades-long “inconsistent” approach to modifications of custody 2 In the 1968 Murphy v Murphy decision, the
Alison Brill Assistant Federal Public Defender Office of the . . . Mr Romano spent time with his family, particularly his fiancée and 84-year-old mother, and visited his father’s grave He applied for jobs, health insurance, his social security card, to renew his driver’s license, and made doctors’ appointments He was in full compliance with the conditions of home confinement SUMF, ¶¶ 44- 54 Around July 11, 2022, the AUSAs again reached out to
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT . . . 4 In his motion, Romano seeks broad protection of any and all privileged communications between Romano and Kanabay surrounding his departure from Sonrai For purposes of this ruling, however, the Court limits its consideration only to those purportedly privileged communications that are attached to Sonrai’s renewed sanctions motion In addition to the text messages, Sonrai attached an e-mail
Romano v. Romano, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 1 (Jan. 13, 2022) Background In 2019, appellant Aaron Romano and respondent Tracy Romano divorced The parties agreed to create a timeshare regarding the physical custody of their seven children According to the timeshare, Aaron would hold custody of the oldest three children for approximately 90 percent of the time Tracy, on the other hand, would hold custody of the four younger children for approximately 95
Romano v Steelcase Inc. - New York State Unified Court System Romano v Steelcase Inc 2010 NY Slip Op 32645(U) September 21, 2010 Supreme Court, Suffolk County Docket Number: 2006-2233 Judge: Jeffrey Arlen Spinner Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service
Romano v EAN Holdings LLC Romano v EAN Holdings LLC 2021 NY Slip Op 33992(U) September 24, 2021 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: Index No 718263 19 Judge: Carmen R Velasquez Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i e , 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service This opinion is