Search for: "In the Matter of: M.M" Results 1 - 20 of 56
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Nov 2023, 7:42 am by Andrew Vey
M.M. emphasizes the importance of employers including clear and proportional confidentiality provisions in their settlement agreements. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 6:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
Approximately one month after that filing, MM removed all mention of the matter from her LinkedIn profile. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 6:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
Approximately one month after that filing, MM removed all mention of the matter from her LinkedIn profile. [read post]
1 Jan 2023, 4:00 am by Administrator
One Sunday each month we bring you a summary from Supreme Advocacy LLP of recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. [read post]
21 Mar 2022, 11:56 am by Kate Fort
When we speak of “concurrent jurisdiction,” we refer to a situation in which two (or perhaps more) different courts are authorized to exercise jurisdiction over the same subject matter, such that a litigant may choose to proceed in either forum.FN13 As the Minnesota Supreme Court explained in a case involving an Indian tribe, “[c]oncurrent jurisdiction describes a situation where two or more tribunals are authorized to hear and dispose of a matter *915 and the… [read post]
22 Feb 2021, 8:02 am by Legal Profession Prof
Two incidents have led to a motion to consent to disbarment in Illinois On April 25, 2019, Movant appeared with M.M. for a court appearance in her criminal matter. [read post]
9 Feb 2021, 4:00 am by Marcelo Rodriguez
As matter of introduction In the context of Canada, there are three territories, namely Yukon, Northwest Territories (NWT) and Nunavut. [read post]
4 Jun 2020, 4:48 pm by Rohit De
Born to an intelligence officer in the British Indian Army, M.M Kaye returned to Simla in 1941 after a decade of living in London and earning a living as a writer and children’s book illustrator. [read post]
15 Apr 2020, 1:59 pm by Eugene Volokh
Under the First Amendment, opinions based on disclosed facts are "absolutely privileged," no matter " 'how derogatory' " they are. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 1:00 pm by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Nonetheless, M.M. was 15 years old when the video was recorded and therefore was incapable of consenting to sexual conduct as a matter of law. [read post]