Search for: "State v. Sullivan" Results 2301 - 2320 of 2,731
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Apr 2009, 2:55 pm
Richman pointed us to a federal statute called the Hyde Amendment, which, according to this 2005 Second Circuit opinion in a case called U.S. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 4:16 pm
Kelvin Rutledge, again rather valiantly, submitted an argument drawing on certain sentences from the judgments in Hammersmith & Fulham v Monk and Crawley BC v Ure but these cases involved joint tenants and were not relevant to this issue. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 4:15 am
Lawsuit for libel brought against public official turns on whether the statements objected to were uttered with "actual malice"Shulman v Hunderfund, 2009 NY Slip Op 02263, Decided on March 26, 2009, Court of AppealsIn the words of Justice Smith, "In this action for libel by a public figure, the record does not clearly and convincingly show that the statements in question were made with "actual malice," as required by New York Times Co. v Sullivan… [read post]
26 Mar 2009, 1:18 pm
Dunoff1039 EPSTEIN: SUPREME NEGLECT: HOW TO REVIVE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION FOR PRIVATE PROPERTYWilliam Michael Treanor1059 SULLIVAN, COLBY, WELSH WEGNER, BOND, & SHULMAN: EDUCATING LAWYERS: PREPARATION FOR THE PROFESSION OF LAWAnthony V. [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 4:53 am
Dan Kennedy in Media Nation notes that Judge Torruella ignored a 1964 ruling in Times v. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 1:58 am
Many of these lawsuits were filed in state court. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 3:03 pm
Sullivan departed from the original understanding of the freedom of speech and of the press as to state action... [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 3:00 am
Rod  Sullivan will argue for the respondent. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 5:17 am
Sullivan in his blog and later by the New York Times. . . . [read post]
21 Feb 2009, 11:18 pm by Aaron Morris
This week the Ninth Circuit withdrew its published decision in Sullivan v. [read post]
19 Feb 2009, 10:09 am
Weideman Last November, the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Sullivan v. [read post]