Search for: "ROGERS v. STATE" Results 2101 - 2120 of 3,088
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Oct 2023, 4:00 am by Jim Sedor
John Rogers says he is ready to fight the charges and seek another term in the Alabama Legislature. [read post]
17 Mar 2019, 5:35 pm by INFORRM
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 4:00 am by Administrator
Law Firm Partners and the Scope of Labour Laws Brian Langille, Professor of Law, University of Toronto and Pnina Alon-Shenker, Associate Professor and Director of Ryerson Law & Business Clinic, Ted Rogers School of Management at Ryerson University Reprinted with permission. (2015) 4:2 Canadian Journal of Human Rights 211 Excerpt: Introductory abstract and Parts III and IV[Footnotes omitted. [read post]
22 Nov 2012, 12:27 am by legalinformatics
Miller, Penn State University: Rhetoric and Judicial Activism: The Case of Hillary Goodridge v. [read post]
4 Jul 2010, 6:02 pm by Duncan
(Public Knowledge) Michael Geist presentation: ACTA – The state of play (Michael Geist) Australia I thought cats were colour blind… Federal Court confirms Mars has exclusive right to use colour ‘Whiskas purple’ for cat food: Mars Australia Pty Ltd (formerly Effem Foods Pty Ltd) v Société des Produits Nestlé SA (Australian Trade Marks Law Blog) FCAFC: On appeal, simulated flames from direct light found infringing: Bitech… [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 4:18 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
New York County 2012), citing, Mosher-Simons v County of Allegany, 99 NY2d 214, 219, 783 N.E.2d 509, 753 N.Y.S.2d 444 (2002), quoting Tarter v State of New York. 68 NY2d 511, 518, 503 N.E.2d 84, 510 N.Y.S.2d 528 (1986). [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 7:54 am
 According to Caterpillar,despite the requirement laid down by the Court of Appeal in Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1987] Ch 117 and Roger Bullivant Ltd v Ellis (1987) ICR 464 that the confidential information be identified, the court could still apply the principle established by the House of Lords in Bolkiah v KPMG [1998] UKHL 52 that an ex-employee can be barred from carrying out specified work for a new employer unless that employee is able to… [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 10:42 am by Jonathan H. Adler
The Supreme Court has not gone so far, see Minneci v. [read post]