Search for: "State v. Hughes"
Results 221 - 240
of 1,799
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Sep 2024, 9:15 am
Hugh Tomlinson KC is a member of the Matrix Chambers media and information group and an editor of Inforrm. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 12:45 am
In this post, Kenny Henderson, David Bridge, Jessica Foley and Devina Shah, who all work within the litigation and arbitration team at CMS, comment on the decision handed down last week by the UK Supreme Court in the matter Mastercard Incorporated and others v Walter Hugh Merricks CBE [2020] UKSC 51, which has significant implications for the UK competition law collective proceedings (or class actions) regime. [read post]
6 Jan 2022, 10:52 am
” In particular, Justice Gorsuch notes that the majority in Nixon v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 7:54 am
Category: Recent Decisions;Tort Law Opinions Body: AC33291 - Local 84, Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, it Territories and Canada, AFL-CIO, CLC v. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 4:16 pm
This issue’s (volume 39, number 2) article was written by Jessie Steffan while she was a law student (she is now a clerk at the District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri) and it won the Supreme Court Historical Society’s 2013 Hughes-Gossett student prize. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 4:16 pm
This issue’s (volume 39, number 2) article was written by Jessie Steffan while she was a law student (she is now a clerk at the District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri) and it won the Supreme Court Historical Society’s 2013 Hughes-Gossett student prize. [read post]
14 May 2020, 1:13 am
It was a misdirection to say one needed to broadly compensate each individual. 1209: Ms Demetriou QC says it is clear that the Tribunal saw there as being a governing principle that individual claimants must be restored to position they would have been in but for the infringement, which is wrong as a matter of statutory construction. 1202: Ms Demetriou QC states that the compensatory principle is not irrelevant at distribution stage, but it is not a statutory requirement. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 9:30 pm
Supreme Court—in Hughes v. [read post]
21 Feb 2017, 4:24 pm
The court found that the comments concerning the drug use of Ms Rubio’s boyfriend, R.B., had related solely to the state of their relationship and had not alleged that Ms Rubio had incited him directly to take drugs. [read post]
1 Jun 2019, 1:01 am
Near v. [read post]
22 Apr 2020, 1:58 am
© Hugh Stephens, 2020. [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 12:16 am
The case was TXI v. [read post]
3 Jan 2008, 6:19 am
The New Jersey Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the matter of State v. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 1:56 am
In R v May, R v Jennings, R v Green the House of Lords directed courts to consider the three questions which arise in making a confiscation order separately, even if the result was a low order. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 8:51 am
In Marks v. [read post]
8 May 2008, 8:34 pm
State, 187 S.W.3d 486 (Tex. [read post]
24 Jun 2018, 9:40 am
United States, 320 U.S. 81 (1943). [read post]
20 Sep 2017, 8:23 am
As a consequence scholars knew very little about the Court’s internal deliberations in the landmark cases of its 1936 October Term.This article, which is based upon a review of all of the surviving docket books from that Term, considers what those sources can teach us about the cases comprising what some have called the “switch-in-time”: West Coast Hotel Co v Parrish, which upheld Washington State’s minimum wage law for women and overruled Adkins v… [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 10:16 am
This article, which is based upon a review of all of the surviving docket books from that Term, considers what those sources can teach us about the cases comprising what some have called the “switch-in-time”: West Coast Hotel Co v Parrish, which upheld Washington State’s minimum wage law for women and overruled Adkins v Children’s Hospital; the Labor Board Cases, which upheld the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act; and the Social… [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 10:16 am
This article, which is based upon a review of all of the surviving docket books from that Term, considers what those sources can teach us about the cases comprising what some have called the “switch-in-time”: West Coast Hotel Co v Parrish, which upheld Washington State’s minimum wage law for women and overruled Adkins v Children’s Hospital; the Labor Board Cases, which upheld the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act; and the Social… [read post]
