Search for: "Commonwealth v. Martin, R." Results 1 - 20 of 67
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jan 2023, 7:32 am
  Conundrum follows--yet most participants in the chattering about this remain blissfully oblivious to the analytics of that conundrum.It ought to surprise few people, then, that in this anarchic and dynamic environment, the concept of value maximization, its meaning, and its relevance remains hotly contested, sometimes as part of the debate about corporate purpose (see Brief Thoughts on Martin Lipton: "ESG, Stakeholder Governance, and the Duty of the Corporation" (Harvard… [read post]
16 Feb 2022, 5:03 am by Eugene Volokh
From an opinion issued last year by Virginia Circuit Court Judge Everett Martin in Ashby v. [read post]
17 Jun 2020, 1:12 am by Michael Douglas
Inghams sought to restrain the referral to arbitration and failed at first instance; see Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Hannigan [2019] NSWSC 1186. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Although marriage is a fundamental right, this is not a case—like Loving or, more recently, Obergefell v. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 9:30 pm by Mitra Sharafi
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte World Development Movement (1994): Financial Prudence, Interfering BusybodiesAbimbola A Olowofoyeku18. [read post]
24 Aug 2019, 6:30 am by Dan Ernst
[We're moving this up, because we've received an updated version of the program. [read post]
31 Mar 2019, 11:50 pm by INFORRM
Buiten, Alexandre de Streel and Martin Peitz, University of Mannheim, University of Namur and University of Mannheim – Department of Economics. [read post]
30 May 2017, 10:33 pm
|Fordham 25|Unwired Planet v Huawei: Is FRAND now a competition law free zone? [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 7:09 am
  Here’s how they work together:Comment b following §908 further states that “[r]eckless indifference to the rights of others and conscious action in deliberate disregard of them (see §500) may provide the necessary state of mind to justify punitive damages. [read post]