Search for: "FELTS v. STATE"
Results 2621 - 2640
of 5,849
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jul 2012, 6:51 am
Some cases set no reasonable expectation of privacy for material posted on the public internet, United States v. [read post]
25 May 2011, 3:08 am
In FA (Iraq) (FC) (Respondent) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) court felt that it could not rule on a particularly tricky question of whether because a right of appeal exists against a refusal of an asylum application, European law requires that a right of appeal also be available against a refusal of an application for humanitarian protection (see the UK Supreme Court Blog’s case preview). [read post]
14 May 2012, 10:16 am
SALVESON, Plaintiff, -vs- KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Defendant.CIV. 104045UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA2012 U.S. [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 6:32 am
"I was struck by how it felt like this post could have been written today. [read post]
12 May 2014, 9:51 am
The plaintiff in Kellett v. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 5:00 am
The decision in Dahlia v. [read post]
20 Mar 2016, 9:11 am
In Homman v. [read post]
25 May 2007, 9:07 pm
The case of Holland v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 12:28 pm
In Dabbs v. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 5:00 am
The decision in Dahlia v. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 5:00 am
The decision in Dahlia v. [read post]
25 Oct 2016, 6:24 am
Transnational advocacy flourished, as Americans worked, listened, and felt on behalf of distant strangers. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 12:30 pm
"He also commented that in Interflora 1 (Interflora Inc v Marks and Spencer plc [2012] EWCA Civ 1501 [noted by the IPKat here] Lewison L.J. had stated that different considerations from the general position on surveys apply where the issue is whether a registered mark has acquired distinctiveness. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 8:07 am
The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Fraser v. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 12:56 pm
Community for Creative Non-Violence (1984) (requiring that a facially content-neutral ban on camping must be "justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech"); United States v. [read post]
30 Jun 2017, 11:52 am
Only a higher court can say now whether there is more to s.98(4)(b) than Lord Simon of Glaisdale felt able to see in it in Devis v Atkins[1977] AC 931, which was a wide construction of “reasonably” (a formula which, with great respect, could be used to justify a band of possible decisions broad enough to encompass what a tribunal views as substantively inequitable and unmeritorious dismissals). [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 10:05 am
And it is inconsistent with KSR v. [read post]
17 Oct 2008, 4:10 pm
Hewlett-Packard Co. v. [read post]
25 May 2022, 6:03 am
From Weidman v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 9:17 am
The case of Harris v. [read post]
