Search for: "Johnson v. C" Results 1 - 20 of 2,271
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 May 2024, 11:38 am by INFORRM
Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Johnson dismissed most of Assange’s legal arguments but said that unless “satisfactory” assurances were given by the US, he would be able to bring an appeal on three grounds. [read post]
17 May 2024, 4:43 am by Matthias Weller
First and foremost, the Johnson Ministry was dedicated to re-access the Lugano Convention[23] which extended the Brussels regime to certain Member States of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA)/European Economic Area (EEA) in its own right.[24] Given the strong resentments Brexiteers showed against the CJEU during their campaign this move is not without a certain irony, as its case law is also crucial to the uniform interpretation of the Lugano Convention.[25] Whereas Switzerland,… [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 11:16 am by Eugene Volokh
Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 412 (1989) (holding that a law based on the communicative or emotive impact of speech on its audience is content based and subject to "the most exacting scrutiny" (quoting Boos v. [read post]
8 Apr 2024, 10:08 am by admin
As a practical matter, the burden shifts to the party that wishes to challenge the relied upon facts and data to learn more about the cited studies to show that the facts and data are not sufficient under Rule 702(b), and that the testimony is not the product of reliable methods under Rule 702(c). [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
For many business economists and legal academics, the purpose of any business organization is simply stated: to maximize profits. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 5:06 am by Scott Bomboy
§ 1512(c), which prohibits obstruction of an official proceeding including congressional proceedings. [read post]
3 Mar 2024, 12:24 pm by Josh Blackman
[Professor Shugerman's argument that the 1793 Hamilton Document, that is, a list of "every person holding any civil office or employment under the United States, (except the judges)," was intended to ensure compliance with the Constitution's Sinecure Clause lacks support.] [read post]