Search for: "W. v. W."
Results 1 - 20
of 22,001
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 May 2024, 12:21 pm
W. [read post]
30 May 2024, 10:54 am
Wheble (1771): A New “First” Trademark Case at Common LawLawrence Goldstone, Unreliable Narrator: The Federalist EssaysBruce W. [read post]
30 May 2024, 7:34 am
State v. [read post]
30 May 2024, 5:00 am
# # #456, LLC v W. [read post]
30 May 2024, 4:05 am
Supreme Court's decision in Van Orden v. [read post]
29 May 2024, 4:58 pm
In West Palm Beach Firefighters' Pension Fund v. [read post]
29 May 2024, 3:52 pm
For scholarly publications, Rule 10.7.1(d) adds a descriptive parenthetical note for citing cases where an enslaved person was involved, and provides examples like “Wall v. [read post]
28 May 2024, 3:24 am
” TransUnion LLC v. [read post]
27 May 2024, 8:48 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
24 May 2024, 9:30 pm
John Kirk, George W. [read post]
24 May 2024, 6:51 pm
Shugerman, SEC v. [read post]
24 May 2024, 7:49 am
W. v. [read post]
24 May 2024, 7:17 am
In cases involving children, the familiar Article 8/10 judicial “balancing exercise” is conducted with regard to an additional legal principle – that “[w]here the best interests of the child clearly favour a certain course, that course should be followed, unless countervailing reasons of considerable force displace them” (K v News Group Newspapers [2011] 1 WLR 1827, per Ward LJ, [19]). [read post]
23 May 2024, 7:07 pm
[In Brown v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 2:52 pm
One of the proposed amendment stems from Crispo v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 6:00 am
Decades later, we affirmed a compensation award to an employee assaulted by a man "he had never previously seen," because under the WCL § 21 (1) presumption, "[w]hen an injury is sustained in the course of employment it will be presumed, as a matter of law, that it did arise out [*2]of the employment" (Slade v Perkins, 42 AD2d 667, 668 [1973], affd 33 NY2d 988 [1974]). [read post]
23 May 2024, 6:00 am
Decades later, we affirmed a compensation award to an employee assaulted by a man "he had never previously seen," because under the WCL § 21 (1) presumption, "[w]hen an injury is sustained in the course of employment it will be presumed, as a matter of law, that it did arise out [*2]of the employment" (Slade v Perkins, 42 AD2d 667, 668 [1973], affd 33 NY2d 988 [1974]). [read post]
22 May 2024, 9:01 pm
Citing the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Ryan v. [read post]
22 May 2024, 8:21 am
Farmworker Assoc. of Fla. v. [read post]
22 May 2024, 7:03 am
From Luke v. [read post]
