Search for: "Davis v. Grant"
Results 201 - 220
of 2,629
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Jun 2022, 9:25 am
Davis, 531 U. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 5:58 am
” 3 KENNETH DAVIS, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TREATISE, § 20.04 at 74 (1958); accord, Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 4:06 pm
Arron Banks has been granted permission to appeal against Steyn J’s decision in his unsuccessful libel action against journalist Carole Cadwalladr. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 12:28 am
The main residence of Veraton, circa 1907. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:03 am
So granted mark is rarely interrogated. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 6:30 am
To a political scientist, one way is by viewing it as a power play by the rabbinate, an attempt many centuries before the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Cooper v Aaron to engage in a performative utterance establishing themselves as the “ultimate interpreters” of the document in question, whether the Torah or the Constitution. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 11:36 am
But the contrast with the earlier case of Contractreal Ltd v Davies (2001) EWCA Civ 928 was resolveable. [read post]
20 Jun 2022, 3:11 am
“An attorney may not be held liable for failing to act outside the scope of a retainer” (Attallah v Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLP, 168 AD3d 1026, 1028 [2d Dept 2019]; see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435 [2007]). [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 9:08 pm
Respondents moved to dismiss the petition, and Supreme Court granted the motion. [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 9:08 pm
Respondents moved to dismiss the petition, and Supreme Court granted the motion. [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 12:05 pm
Self-service kiosks under fire Davis v. [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
Supreme Court overturn Roe v. [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 3:44 am
” “It is well settled that “[a]n attorney may not be held liable for failing to act outside the scope of the retainer” (Genesis Merchant Partners, L.P. v Gilbride, Tusa, Last & Spellane, LLC, 157 AD3d 479,482 [1st Dept 2018], citingAmbase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardell, 8 NY3d 428 [2007]). [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 9:05 pm
Some have argued that, because the Nation’s approach to climate change is politically contested,[1] and since these matters affect major policy questions over which Congress has not granted the SEC new, explicit powers, the Commission lacks authority to require disclosure in this area.[2] For the reasons given below, the Commission should disregard these claims, focusing instead on the challenging policy choices that any finalization of the proposal would require. [read post]
11 Jun 2022, 12:26 pm
This is evident, for instance, in the fact that all the Supreme Court's sexual harassment cases have been nonpseudonymous (except Davis as next friend of LaShonda D. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 6:27 am
Case citation: Davis v. [read post]
9 Jun 2022, 9:01 pm
Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (2015) and Rucho v. [read post]
8 Jun 2022, 6:42 pm
The court rejects Boule’s argument that a First Amendment retaliation claim is similar to the employment-discrimination claim the court allowed in Davis v. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 10:32 am
In that statute, Congress exercised its power under Section 3 to lift the disabilities that the provision had imposed upon large categories of Confederate officers and officials—in essence, all but the highest-ranking ones, like Confederate president Jefferson Davis. [read post]
2 Jun 2022, 10:39 am
Sedlik v. [read post]
