Search for: "Miller v. Sparks" Results 1 - 20 of 61
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Apr 2022, 4:09 am by Emma Snell
  Moldovan MPs have passed a ban on Russian war symbols, including the letters Z and V and the St George ribbon. [read post]
18 Jul 2021, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
Junejo v New Vision TV Limited, heard 24 and  25 March 2021 (Murray J) Miller v College of Policing and another, heard 9 and 10 March 2021 (Sharp P,  Haddon-Cave and Simler LJJ) Wright [read post]
1 Jul 2021, 10:05 pm by Jeff Richardson
" Chance Miller of 9to5Mac also reported on Apple's release of a public beta. [read post]
20 Jun 2021, 4:14 pm by INFORRM
Internet and Social Media Indian police have registered a case against Twitter and prominent journalists for allegedly trying to spark communal tensions. [read post]
12 Feb 2021, 3:32 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Creative spark is required, but there is no additional threshold of capacity. [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 2:52 pm by Michel-Adrien
This was perhaps best exemplified by the rendering of the verdict in R v Theriault, 2020 ONSC 5725 [Theriault], in June, in which over 20,000 people watched the verdict being read to hear whether the Theriault brothers, two off-duty police officers who pursued and injured Dafonte Miller, a Black teen, would be convicted of assault. [read post]
19 Aug 2020, 1:27 pm by kwalters
  *Mary Ziegler is the Stearns Weaver Miller Professor at Florida State University College of Law and the author of Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. [read post]
23 Feb 2020, 4:11 pm by INFORRM
The decision in R (Miller) v (1) The College of Policing, and (2) The Chief Constable of Humberside [2020] EWHC 225 (Admin) tackles police recording, retention and dissemination of information about individuals in relation to “non-crime” hate  incidents. [read post]
15 Jul 2019, 4:54 am by Andrei Gribakov
This sparked speculation on whether the state would apply for adequacy under the GDPR. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 11:18 am by Howard Knopf
Miller contends that the act of putting an affiant to an election is the suppression of evidence for which his client is entitled to punitive damages. [read post]