Search for: "People v. Board" Results 261 - 280 of 8,620
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Sep 2016, 12:50 pm by Sasha Volokh
The Supreme Court recognized as much in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 6:56 pm by Mitu Gulati
  The case involves an infamously aggressive hedge fund making an audacious challenge to the constitutionality of the Puerto Rican Control Board—an argument that is framed (hilariously, I think) as rescuing the Puerto Rican people from tyranny. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 6:51 am by Dana Carson
Loop identifies the following examples of potential triggers that would require management to escalate an issue to the board: (i) people have been hurt, (ii) company property has been severely damaged, (iii) the crisis will have a significant financial impact, (iv)  critical systems are offline for a specified period of time, and (v) an event occurs that is getting significant negative social media attention. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 1:03 pm by Deborah Hammonds
For further information, contact Timothy Creagan at (202) 272-0016 (v), (202) 272-0074 (TTY), or visit the Access Board’s website. [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 6:51 am by Dana Carson
Loop identifies the following examples of potential triggers that would require management to escalate an issue to the board: (i) people have been hurt, (ii) company property has been severely damaged, (iii) the crisis will have a significant financial impact, (iv)  critical systems are offline for a specified period of time, and (v) an event occurs that is getting significant negative social media attention. [read post]
17 Feb 2022, 9:30 am by Eric Goldman
The court summarizes the case: Cub Club Investment created an app that allowed people to send racially diverse emoji. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 12:30 pm by Lawrence Cunningham
People like Joe Nocera of the New York Times take the suit as further evidence of incompetence at HP’s board. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 12:14 pm by Graham Smith
  He likened Google to the owner of a wall on which people chose to inscribe graffiti, for which the owner was not responsible. [read post]