Search for: "People v. Levell (1988)"
Results 261 - 280
of 461
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 May 2014, 6:16 am
Even actual “speakers” rarely get more than 8 minutes, unless they are very prominent people such as judges or senior government or WIPO people speaking on very important topics. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 11:57 am
Hawk v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 9:01 pm
The Practice of Surrogacy At the most basic level, surrogacy is any arrangement in which a woman carries a baby for someone else. [read post]
17 Apr 2014, 2:22 pm
In McDonald v. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 3:27 pm
” This broadly mirrored the case law, notably, R v Brent LBC, ex p. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 3:27 pm
” This broadly mirrored the case law, notably, R v Brent LBC, ex p. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 9:57 am
At the national level, also super-learned Mr Justice Arnold said [in his 2013 decision in SAS v WPL, at para 27] that:"In the light of a number of recent judgments of the CJEU, it may be arguable that it is not a fatal objection to a claim that copyright subsists in a particular work that the work is not one of the kinds of work listed in section 1(1)(a) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents 1988 and defined elsewhere in that Act." [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 7:54 am
The Court of Appeals doesn't see it that way.The case is McCulloch v. [read post]
21 Feb 2014, 6:59 am
Should Bivens exactly track what the Supreme Court had held by 1988? [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 9:01 pm
He says, for example, drawing on the gender-based peremptory case, J.E.B. v. [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 5:54 am
Supreme Court stripped tribal governments of their criminal authority over non-Indians in Oliphant v. [read post]
1 Feb 2014, 6:45 am
In People v. [read post]
30 Jan 2014, 1:31 am
This text may seem a little puzzling to people who don't walk the streets of London, but there was some rhyme and reason: it was in response to a very striking advertisement by gay rights campaign organisation Stonewall, which read: "SOME PEOPLE ARE GAY, GET OVER IT!" [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 9:52 am
Rural Electric Convenience Cooperative, Inc. (7th Cir. 1988). [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 7:20 am
While the case related to whether Murphy had been lawfully prosecuted under section 297(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) for intending to avoid programme reception charges (which the CJEU and then High Court confirmed she had not, as she had not intended to avoid but merely to pay less via use of a foreign decoder), it opened up the wider issue of retransmission rights. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 9:01 pm
RFRA only kicks in when the level of participation that is mandated actually contradicts religious obligation. [read post]
19 Dec 2013, 9:01 pm
Or take Frisby v. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 12:57 pm
Likewise, numerous courts have struck down university-level speech codes that restrict student speech. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 5:20 am
Static Control didn’t have antitrust standing federally, per 6th Cir.Rebecca Tushnet - Georgetown University Law Center, representing amicus curiae, Law ProfessorsWhy should people who are primarily interested in TM care? [read post]
7 Nov 2013, 9:01 pm
In particular, we argued that unlike prayers used to open legislative sessions at the state legislative level (one of which was upheld by the Supreme Court, largely on the basis of unbroken historical tradition, in Marsh v. [read post]
