Search for: "James E. v. Commissioner of Correction"
Results 1 - 20
of 50
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Jan 2024, 9:02 pm
I dissent from the Commission’s denial of a petition to amend Rule 202.5(e), our so-called gag rule.[1] This de facto rule follows from the Commission’s enforcement of its policy, adopted in 1972, that it will not “permit a defendant or respondent to consent to a judgment or order that imposes a sanction while denying the allegations in the complaint or order for proceedings. [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 5:04 am
On 19 October 2011, the Supreme Court (Lord Hope, Lord Walker, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Wilson) released its decision in the joined cases of R (Davies & Anor) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs and R (Gaines-Cooper) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2011] UKSC 47. [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 5:04 am
On 19 October 2011, the Supreme Court (Lord Hope, Lord Walker, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke and Lord Wilson) released its decision in the joined cases of R (Davies & Anor) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs and R (Gaines-Cooper) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2011] UKSC 47. [read post]
22 Jul 2008, 6:08 pm
James v. [read post]
14 Jun 2021, 10:31 am
Amicus brief from IP/Internet/Antitrust professors. * FTC opinions: majority by Commissioner Simons, concurrence by Commissioner Slaughter, dissent by Commissioner Phillips. [read post]
8 May 2008, 12:01 pm
Marquart (NFP) NFP criminal opinions today (14): James E. [read post]
Review of the Effects of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act on Third Party Participation Applicants
1 Feb 2012, 9:15 am
James G. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 6:01 am
The Supreme Court of New Zealand 2004-2013© 2015 Thomson Reuters New Zealandedited by Matthew Barber and Mary-Rose Russell, Senior Lecturers in Law, Auckland University of Technology Excerpt: selections from Chapter 3: A Barrister’s Perspective by James Farmer QC [Footnotes omitted. [read post]
24 Oct 2021, 4:17 pm
IPSO IPSO has published four rulings since our last Round Up: 00006-21 Hackett v Hull Daily Mail, 1 Accuracy (2019), Breach – sanction: publication of correction 04283-21 Friel v thejc.com, 1 Accuracy (2021), No breach – after investigation 05855-21 Duah v metro.co.uk, 1 Accuracy (2019), 3 Harassment (2019), 12 Discrimination (2019), No breach – after investigation 07938-21 various v express.co.uk, 1 Accuracy (2019), Breach –… [read post]
8 Jul 2021, 7:11 pm
Rooming House Act did not apply to Assisted Living Facility here ESTATE OF JAMES BURNS, by and through BRIAN BURNS, EXECUTOR,v CARE ONE AT STANWICK, LLC d/b/a CARE ONE HARMONY VILLAGE AT MOORESTOWN and CARE ONE, LLC,SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISIONDOCKET NO. [read post]
2 Jan 2013, 3:17 pm
FLMD E. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 6:30 am
E, Moritz v. [read post]
9 May 2022, 1:35 am
There is now a requirement to correct significant inaccuracies and misleading statements on the same online platform that the statement was originally published. [read post]
6 Sep 2018, 8:03 am
In case you missed the in-depth coverage of Employment Law Daily for August, here’s a recap of some key developments in the L&E community. [read post]
13 Dec 2007, 11:09 am
Winterwood Properties, James M. [read post]
29 Oct 2017, 5:31 pm
This means that data protection of Facebook’s business would not be exclusively limited to the Irish Data Protection Commissioner. [read post]
25 Apr 2021, 4:52 pm
Fabbrini, E. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 6:24 am
Ct. 2783 (2008) and McDonald v. [read post]
21 Dec 2007, 7:39 am
Below you will find the UCP affiliates for Wisconsin: UCP of Greater Dane County 1502 Greenway Cross Madison, WI 53713 Phone: (608) 273-4434 Fax: (608) 273-3426 E-mail: camilla@ucpdane.org Web: http://www.ucpdane.org UCP of North Central Wisconsin 740 North Third Street Wausau, WI 54403 Phone: (715) 842-8700; (800) 472-4408 (Toll Free) Fax: (715) 848-3511 E-mail: kbreitenfeldt@ucp-wausau.org Web: http://www.ucp-wausau.org UCP of Southeastern Wisconsin 7519 West Oklahoma… [read post]
9 Jan 2011, 4:16 pm
Spencer v. [read post]
